Fire Safe Regulations also include a minimum setback of 30 feet for all buildings from property lines and/or the center of a road. Section 1273.08, Dead-End Roads, of these standards provides regulations for the maximum lengths of single-access roadways:
Parcels zoned for less than one acre: 800 feet
Parcels zoned for 1 acre to 4.99 acres: 1,320 feet
Parcels zoned for 5 acres to 19.99 acres: 2,640 feet
Parcels zoned for 20 acres or larger: 5,280 feet
Fire Safe Regulations, Section 1299.03, Fire Hazard Reduction Around Buildings and Structure Requirements, provides defensible space requirements for areas within 30 feet of a structure (Zone 1) and 2 California State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, 2018, 2018 Strategic Fire Plan for California, https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/community-wildfire-preparedness-and-mitigation/fire-plan/, accessed January 11, 2024. 3 California State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, 2018, 2018 Strategic Fire Plan for California, https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/community-wildfire-preparedness-and-mitigation/fire-plan/, accessed January 11, 2024. 938
CC 05-14-2024
938 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
4.16-4 APRIL 2024
between 30 and 100 feet from a structure (Zone 2). In Zone 1, all dead and dying plants must be removed, as must any vegetation that could catch fire. In Zone 2, horizontal and vertical spacing among shrubs and trees must be created and maintained.
Public Resources Code Section 4291
Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 4291, Mountainous, Forest-, Brush- and Grass-Covered Lands, is intended for any person who owns, lease, controls, operates, or maintains a building or structure in a mountainous area, forest-covered lands, shrub-covered lands, grass-covered lands, or land that is covered with flammable material, regardless of whether the property is in an SRA or Very High FHSZ. This section requires defensible space to be maintained within 100 feet from each side of a structure. An emberresistant zone is also required within 5 feet of a structure and more intense fuel reduction between 5 and 30 feet of a structure.
California Building Standards Code
The California Buildings Standards Code (CCR Title 24) provides 12 different codes for construction and buildings in California. This code is updated every three years, with the most recent version effective January 1, 2023. Cupertino regularly adopts the most recent version of the California Building Standards Code, with modifications, into the Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC), Title 16, Building and Construction.
Building Design Standards
The California Building Code (CBC), Part 2 of CCR Title 24, identifies building design standards, including those for fire safety. It is effective statewide, but a local jurisdiction may adopt more restrictive standards based on local conditions under specific amendment rules prescribed by the State Building Standards Commission. Residential buildings are plan checked by local city building officials for compliance with the CBC and any applicable local edits. Typical fire safety requirements of the CBC include the installation of sprinklers in buildings and other facilities; the establishment of fire-resistance standards for fire doors, building materials, and particular types of construction in high FHSZs; requirements for smoke-detection systems; exiting requirements; and the clearance of debris.
Materials and Methods for Exterior Wildfire Exposure
Chapter 7A of the CBC, Materials and Methods for Exterior Wildfire Exposure, prescribes building materials and construction methods for new buildings in an FHSZ or Wildland Interface Fire Area. Chapter 7A contains requirements for roofing; attic ventilation; exterior walls; exterior windows and glazing; exterior doors; decking; protection of underfloor, appendages, and floor projections; and ancillary structures. Other requirements include vegetation management compliance, as prescribed in the CFC Section 4906 and PRC Section 4291.
California Fire Code
The CFC incorporates, by adoption, the International Fire Code of the International Code Council, with California amendments. This is the official fire code for the State and all political subdivisions. It is found in 24 CCR Part 9, and like the CBC, is revised and published every three years by the California Building 939
CC 05-14-2024
939 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 4.16-5
Standards Commission. Also like the CBC, the CFC is effective statewide, but a local jurisdiction may adopt more restrictive standards based on local conditions. The City of Cupertino regularly adopts each new CFC update under CMC Section 16.40, Fire Code. The CFC is a model code that regulates minimum fire safety regulations for new and existing buildings; facilities; storage; processes, including emergency planning and preparedness; fire service features; fire protection systems; hazardous materials; fire flow requirements; and fire hydrant locations and distribution. Typical fire safety requirements include installation of sprinklers in all buildings; the establishment of fire resistance standards for fire doors, building materials, and particular types of construction; and the clearance of debris and vegetation within a prescribed distance from occupied structures in wildfire hazard areas.
Fire Safety During Construction and Demolition
Chapter 33 of the CFC, Fire Safety During Construction and Demolition, provides requirements for fire safety precautions during construction and demolition of a development project. The purpose of this chapter is to provide reasonable safety to life and property from fire during construction and demolition operations, including those in underground locations. Specific requirements include a prohibition of smoking on-site, except for in approved areas; management of combustible materials and debris; cutting and welding; electrical wiring; and cooking. Additional requirements include the preparation of site safety plans prior to building permit issuance, providing fire watch during nonworking hours, and maintaining water supply for fire protection as soon as combustible materials arrive on a project site.
Wildland-Urban Interface Areas
Chapter 49, Requirements for Wildland Urban Interface Fire Areas, of the CFC applies to any geographical area identified as a FHSZ by CAL FIRE. It defines FHSZs, connects to the SRA/Very High FHSZ Fire Safe Regulation requirements for defensible space, and parallels requirements for wildfire protection building construction and hazardous vegetation fuel management in other sections of the CCR and the PRC.
Chapter 49 of the 2022 CFC includes a definition for the wildland-urban interface (WUI) and provides requirements for fire protection plans, landslide plans, long-term vegetation management, and creation and maintenance of defensible space for all new development within the WUI.
California Public Utilities Commission
In 2007, wildfires in southern California were ignited by overhead utility power lines and aerial communication facilities near power lines. In response, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) began considering and adopting regulations to protect the public from fire hazards due to overhead power lines and nearby aerial communication facilities. The CPUC published a Fire-Threat Map under Rulemaking 15-05-006, following procedures in Decision 17-01-009, revised by Decision 17-06-024, which adopted a work plan for the development of a utility high fire-threat district where enhanced fire safety regulations in Decision 17-12-024 apply.4 The fire regulations require electric utilities to:5 4 California Public Utilities Commission, accessed on January 11, 2024, https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M172/K762/172762082.PDF. 5 California Public Utilities Commission, press release: CPUC Adopts New Fire-Safety Regulations, accessed on January 11, 2024, http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Published/G000/M201/K352/201352402.PDF. 940
CC 05-14-2024
940 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
4.16-6 APRIL 2024
Prioritize the correction of safety hazards.
Correct nonimmediate fire risks in “Tier 2” (elevated fire threat) areas on the CPUC high fire-threat district within 12 months, and in “Tier 3” (extreme fire threat) areas within 6 months. Maintain increased clearances between vegetation and power lines within the high fire-threat district. Maintain stricter wire-to-wire clearances for new and reconstructed facilities in Tier 3 areas. Conduct annual inspections of overhead distribution facilities in rural areas of Tier 2 and Tier 3 areas. Prepare a fire prevention plan annually if overhead facilities exist in the high fire-threat district.
California Environmental Quality Act
In November 2022 the California Attorney General issued the Best Practices for Analyzing and Mitigating Wildfire Impacts of Development Projects Under the California Environmental Quality Act. This guidance document was designed to help lead agencies comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (PRC Section 21000 et seq) when considering whether to approve projects in wildfire-prone areas.
These areas are often in the WUI area—i.e., the area where the built environment meets or intermingles with the natural environment. This guidance provides suggestions for how best to comply with CEQA when analyzing and mitigating a proposed project’s impacts on wildfire ignition risk, emergency access, and evacuation. The guidance is aimed at proposed development projects, such as residential, recreational, or commercial developments. The extent to which it applies will vary by project based on project design and location. It does not impose additional requirements on local governments or alter any applicable laws or regulations, but is intended to provide guidance on some of the issues, alternatives, and mitigation measures that should be considered during the environmental review process.
Regional Regulations
Santa Clara County Wildfire Protection Plan
The Santa Clara County Wildfire Protection Plan, developed in August 2023 by the Santa Clara County FireSafe Council, is intended to assist in protecting human life and reduce property loss from wildfire throughout the county.
6 The 2023 update was prepared in compliance with the Federal Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003 and achieves three major goals:
1. Provide a countywide scale of wildfire risk and protection needs.
2. Bring together all responsible wildfire management and suppression entities in the planning area to address the identified needs.
3. Provide a framework for future planning and implementation of necessary mitigation measures.
Santa Clara County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan The purpose of hazard mitigation planning is to reduce the loss of life and property by minimizing the impact of disasters. The Santa Clara County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) was prepared 6 Santa Clara County, 2023, Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan, accessed January 12, 2024, https://santa-clara-cwpp-sccfc.hub.arcgis.com/.
941
CC 05-14-2024
941 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 4.16-7
and adopted in October 2017 for the purpose of identifying, assessing, and reducing the long-term risk to life and property from hazard events. The adopted HMP was approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and provides more than 344 mitigation actions for implementation by individual planning partners, including the City of Cupertino. The HMP includes a risk assessment and mitigation actions for each of the jurisdictions in the planning partnership. The Cupertino Jurisdictional Annex of the HMP provides an assessment of hazards and vulnerabilities and a set of mitigation actions for Cupertino specifically while considering the results from the countywide effort. In the context of an HMP, mitigation is an action that reduces or eliminates long-term risk to people and property from hazards, including wildfire.
The HMP must be reviewed and approved by FEMA every five years to maintain eligibility for disaster relief funding. As part of this process, the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services reviews all local hazard mitigation plans in accordance with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 regulations, and coordinates with local jurisdictions to ensure compliance with FEMA’s Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide.
Santa Clara County Fire Department Strategic Plan
The Santa Clara County Fire Department Strategic Plan, adopted in 2023, provides goals and strategies focused on short-term challenges and gaps that impede service. The strategic plan is a comprehensive, living, and active management tool that helps focus organizational resources on achieving short-term, measurable outcomes for the Santa Clara County Fire Department. The Santa Clara County Fire Department Strategic Plan includes 12 distinct goals aimed at improving the safety of residents and firefighters, increasing agency resiliency and efficiency, reducing fire-related damage, and preparing the community for disasters.
Local Regulations
General Plan 2040
The General Plan 2040 the Environmental Resources and Sustainability (ES) and Health and Safety (HS) Elements contain goals, policies, and strategies that require local planning and development decisions to consider wildfire impacts. Applicable policies and strategies that would minimize potential adverse wildfire impacts are identified in Section 4.16.3, Impact Discussion.
Municipal Code
The CMC includes various directives to minimize adverse energy impacts from development in Cupertino.
The CMC is organized by title, chapter, and section. Most provisions related to energy use and conservation are in Title 14, Streets, Sidewalks, and Landscaping, and Title 16, Buildings and Construction, as follows:
Chapter 14.20, Underground Utilities; Conversions and Chapter 14.24, Undergrounding Utilities – New Development. CMC Chapter 14.20 allows the City Council to call public hearings to decide whether designated areas of the city require the removal of existing poles, overhead wires, and associated overhead structures related to utility lines. If approved, these areas become Underground Utility Districts and the Public Works Department, in collaboration with the utility owner, shall work together 942
CC 05-14-2024
942 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
4.16-8 APRIL 2024
to underground existing utilities. CMC Chapter 14.24 requires new development to underground all utilities during construction.
Chapter 16.04, Building Code. This chapter adopts the CBC into the CMC. Additionally, Section
16.04.260, Fire Protection and Life Safety Systems, requires all new development to include automatic sprinkler systems and contains regulations for firewalls and fire barriers used to separate building areas.
Chapter 16.08, Excavations, Grading and Retaining Walls. This chapter provides regulations for excavation, grading, clearing, and retaining wall construction, and to preserve and enhance water quality by controlling surface runoff, erosion, and sedimentation, as well as establishes procedures by which these requirements may be enforced.
Chapter 16.40, Fire Code. This chapter adopts the 2022 CFC and the 2021 International Fire Code into the CMC with modifications specific to Cupertino.
Chapter 16.52, Prevention of Flood Damage. This chapter apples to all areas of the special flood hazard zones within the city. This chapter contains requirements for construction, elevation, and floodproofing of buildings within the 100-year floodplain. Chapter 16.74, Wildland Urban Interface Fire Area Adopted. This chapter adopts a map of the Wildland Urban Interface Fire Area into the CMC. This map includes High and Very High FHSZs within the Study Area.
Cupertino Emergency Operations Plan
The City of Cupertino Office of Emergency Management is responsible for coordinating agency response to disasters or other large-scale emergencies in Cupertino. The Cupertino Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) establishes policy direction for emergency planning, mitigation, response, and recovery activities within the city. The EOP addresses interagency coordination, procedures to maintain communications with county and State emergency response teams, and methods to assess the extent of damage and management of volunteers, as well as identifies the location of the Emergency Operations Center. The EOP uses the Standardized Emergency Management System as required by California Government Code Section 8607(a) for managing responses to multiagency and multi-jurisdictional emergencies in California, including those related to hazardous materials.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
The baseline conditions for wildfire were not discussed in the General Plan EIR, and therefore the following sections contain a comprehensive description of wildfire baseline conditions in the Study Area.
Wildfire Background
The term “wildfire” refers to fires that usually result from the ignition of dry grass, brush, or timber.
Historically, wildfires commonly occurred in steep or heavily vegetated areas, which makes suppression of the fire difficult. More recently, wildfires have been encroaching into more urban areas, that is, the wildland-urban interface, threatening homes, businesses, and essential infrastructure. Though wildfires 943
CC 05-14-2024
943 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 4.16-9
play an important role in the ecology of many natural habitats, risks to human safety and property increase as urban development moves into areas susceptible to wildfire hazards.
Types of Wildfires
There are three basic types of wildland fires:7
Crown fires burn trees to their tops; these are the most intense and dangerous wildland fires. Surface fires burn surface litter and duff. These are the easiest fires to extinguish and cause the least damage to the forest. Brush and small trees enable surface fires to reach treetops and are thus referred to as ladder fuels.
Underground fires occur underground in deep accumulations of dead vegetation. These fires move very slowly but can be difficult to extinguish.
Wildfires burn in many types of vegetation—forest, woodland, scrub (including chaparral and sage scrub), and grassland. Many species of native California plants are adapted to fire and habitats such as woodlands, chaparral, and grasslands can recover from fire. For example, some species of chaparral plants, such as ceanothus, require intense heat for germination and therefore have flammable resins on leaves and roots that can quickly sprouts up in burned areas.8 Between 2010 and 2017, wildfires in California burned about 265,000 acres of forest land, 207,000 acres of scrub vegetation, 99,000 acres of grassland, 18,000 acres of desert vegetation, and 14,000 acres of other vegetation types.9 Wildfires have been observed to be more frequent and growing in intensity over the past several years, with 4,304,379 acres and 2,569,386 acres burning in 2020 and 2021, respectively. 10 Wildfire Causes
Although the term wildfire suggests natural origins, a 2017 study that evaluated 1.5 million wildfires in the United States between 1992 and 2012 found that humans were responsible for igniting 84 percent of wildfires, accounting for 44 percent of acreage burned.11 The three most common types of causes of human-caused wildfires are debris burning (logging slash, farm fields, trash, etc.); arson; and equipment 7 Natural Resources Canada, 2021, Fire Behavior, accessed June 16, 2023, https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/forests/ fire-insects-disturbances/fire/13145.
8 National Park Service, 2018, “Wildland Fire in Chaparral: California and Southwestern United States,” https://www.nps.gov/articles/wildland-fire-in-chaparral.htm. 9 State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection and California Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention, August 2018, 2018 Strategic Fire Plan for California, accessed June 16, 2023, https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5590/2018-strategic-fire-plan -approved-08_22_18.pdf. 10 CAL FIRE, “Acres Burned vs Structures Destroyed,” accessed June 16, 2023, https://34c031f8-c9fd-4018-8c5a -4159cdff6b0d-cdn-endpoint.azureedge.net/-/media/calfire-website/images---misc/acres-burned-vs-structures -destroyed2022.jpg?rev=f043785e8027411caa4a6c8b176a4e26&hash=DDC50776FEF6C19D8619CA6337CF2481. 11 Balch, Jennifer, Bethany Bradley, John Abatzoglou, et. al., January 2017, Human-Started Wildfires Expand the Fire Niche Across the United States, accessed June 16, 2023, https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/114/11/2946.full.pdf. 944
CC 05-14-2024
944 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
4.16-10 APRIL 2024
use.12,13 Lightning is the major natural cause of wildfire in the United States, with more than 40 percent of wildfires in the western United States caused by lightning between 1992 and 2015. 14,15
Power lines can ignite wildfires several ways, including:16 Downed lines: downed power lines can produce arcing that can cause the powerlines to spark and ignite vegetation.
Vegetation contact: a branch contacting two conductors for a sufficient duration may ignite the branch; a tree falling on a line can cause a downed line. High winds and severe weather: conductors can slap together during high winds and severe weather, creating arcing of the powerlines and ejecting hot metal particles that can ignite flammable matter on the ground.
Equipment failures: As circuit components deteriorate, they can arc and spark and thus ignite nearby flammable matter.
An analysis of US Forest Service wildfire data from 1986 to 1996 determined that 95 percent of humancaused wildfires, and 90 percent of all wildfires, occurred within 0.5 mile of a road; and that about 61 percent of all wildfires and 55 percent of human-caused wildfires occurred within approximately 650 feet (200 meters) of a road.17 The study concluded that the increase in human-caused ignition from new roads greatly outweighs the benefits of increased access for firefighters.
Wildfires ignite structures in three ways: burning embers landing on the structure or flammable material next to the structure, direct flame contact, and radiant heat from fire close to the structure. Embers are the most common cause of home ignition. Embers ignite structures by entering through attic vents, igniting flammable materials around the home (litter in the roof gutter; wood stacks; or wood fencing), or finding their way under roofing materials.18
CAL FIRE estimated in 2010 that there were about three million housing units in California in FHSZs and potentially at risk from wildland fire—that is, just over 20 percent of the total housing units in the state.19 12 Pacific Biodiversity Institute, May 2007, Roads and Wildfires, accessed June 16, 2023, http://www.pacificbio.org/publications/wildfire_studies/Roads_And_Wildfires_2007.pdf. 13 Miscellaneous human activities (unspecified) are ranked above equipment use in percentage of wildfires caused. 14 Balch, Jennifer, Bethany Bradley, John Abatzoglou, et. al., January 2017, Human-Started Wildfires Expand the Fire Niche Across the United States, accessed June 16, 2023, https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/114/11/2946.full.pdf. 15 Cart, Julie, 2023, “Lightning could spark more California fire as world warms,” CAL MATTERS, accessed January 12, 2024, https://calmatters.org/environment/2021/09/california-fires-lightning/. 16 Texas Wildfire Mitigation Project, 2014, How Do Power Lines Cause Wildfires? accessed June 16, 2023, https://wildfiremitigation.tees.tamus.edu/faqs/how-power-lines-cause-wildfires. 17 Pacific Biodiversity Institute, May 2007, Roads and Wildfires, accessed June 16, 2023, http://www.pacificbio.org/publications/wildfire_studies/Roads_And_Wildfires_2007.pdf. 18 California Chaparral Institute, Protecting Your Home from Fire, accessed June 16, 2023, https://www.californiachaparral.org/fire/protecting-your-home/. 19 State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection and California Department of Forestry and Fire Prevention, August 2018, 2018 Strategic Fire Plan for California, accessed June 16, 2023, https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/5590/2018-strategic-fire-plan -approved-08_22_18.pdf.
945
CC 05-14-2024
945 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 4.16-11
According to CAL FIRE data, approximately 95 percent of structures seriously damaged in California wildfires from 2013 to 2020 took place in FHSZs in the SRA or LRA or on federal lands. 20 Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Areas
The Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area (WUIFA) is any area where structures and other human developments meet or intermingle with wildland vegetative fuels—shrubs, trees, and grasses.
Developments in the WUI exacerbate fire occurrence and fire spread in several ways:
Increased numbers of people near and in wildland areas, creating more frequent human-caused wildfires.
Wildfires become harder to fight due to simultaneous evacuation and firefighting resources diverted from containing the wildfire to protecting lives and homes. Letting natural fires burn becomes impossible, leading to buildup of fuel in brush and forested areas and overgrowth of grasslands, increasing wildfire hazard further. 21 Properties in the WUIFA are subject to building and property maintenance standards intended to prevent and manage community safety due to brush and forest fires. Planning for such areas also requires attention to the availability of access roads and water for firefighting and evacuation efforts.
Secondary Effects of Wildfire
Secondary effects of wildfire include additional hazards such as landslides, poor air quality, and power outages. This section describes potential secondary hazards.
Post-fire landslide hazards include fast-moving, highly destructive debris flows that can occur in the years immediately after wildfires in response to high-intensity rainfall events, and flows that are generated over longer time periods that are accompanied by root decay and loss of soil strength. Post-fire debris flows are particularly hazardous because they can occur with little warning, exert great impulsive loads on objects in their paths, strip vegetation, block drainage ways, damage structures, and endanger human life. Debris flows differ from mudflows in that debris flows are composed of larger particles.
Fires increase the potential for debris flows in two ways:22 Fires may bake soil into a hard crust that repels water. Fires destroy vegetation that would slow and absorb rainfall, and whose roots would help stabilize soil.
20 CapRadio, December 2021, “After years of delays, CalFire says updated and expanded wildfire hazard maps are on their way,” accessed June 16, 2023, https://www.capradio.org/articles/2021/12/20/after-years-of-delays-calfire-says-updated-andexpanded-wildfire-hazard-maps-are-on-their-way/. 21 Radeloff, Volker, David Helmers, H. Kramer, et al., February 2018, Rapid Growth of the US Wildland-Urban Interface Raises Wildfire Risk, accessed January 12, 2024, https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/13/3314.full.pdf. 22 United States Geological Survey, November 2018, “New post-wildfire resource guide now available to help communities cope with flood and debris flow danger,” accessed January 12, 2024, https://www.usgs.gov/center-news/post-wildfire -playbook?qt-news_science_products=1#qt-news_science_products. 946
CC 05-14-2024
946 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
4.16-12 APRIL 2024
Post-fire debris flows are most common in the two years after a fire; they are usually triggered by heavy rainfall. It takes much less rainfall to trigger debris flows from burned basins than from unburned areas. In southern California, as little as 0.3 inches of rainfall in 30 minutes has triggered debris flows, and any storm that has intensities greater than about 0.4 inches per hour can produce debris flows.23 The burning of vegetation and soil on slopes more than doubles the rate that water will run off into watercourses. As discussed in General Plan EIR Section 4.5.1.2, Existing Conditions, landslides and debris flows have the potential to occur in the Study Area, most notably on steeper slopes in the western and southwestern portions of the city. In these areas, landslides are commonly associated with slopes underlain with Franciscan sheared rock (mélange) and pre-existing landslide deposits.24 In addition to damaging natural environments, wildfires can injure and kill residents and firefighters as well as damage or destroy structures and personal property. Wildfires also deplete water reserves, down power lines, disrupt communication services, and block evacuation routes, which can isolate neighborhoods. Wildfires can indirectly cause flooding if flood control facilities become inadequate to handle increases in stormwater runoff, sediment, and debris that are likely to be generated from burn scars.
Regionally, smoke from wildfires creates poor air quality that can last for days or weeks, depending on the scale of the wildfire and wind patterns. Smoke itself is made up of a complex mixture of gases and fine particles produced when wood and other organic materials burn. Health risks from smoke inhalation are largely from microscopic particles (PM2.5) that can penetrate the lungs and cause a range of health problems, including chronic heart and lung diseases. Exposure to particulate pollution is even linked to premature death. There are some populations that are more sensitive than others to smoke—for instance, people with heart or lung diseases, seniors, children, people with diabetes, people with compromised immune systems, and pregnant women.25 Through observations of wildfires, experts have determined that the large plumes of smoke from large wildfires can result in that smoke and ash being carried thousands of miles from the burn area of the wildfire. Therefore, air pollution is a major secondary risk from wildfires in the region.26
Wildfire in the Study Area
The Study Area has land in both an LRA and SRA. As shown on Figure 4.16-1, Fire Hazard Severity Zones, portions along the northwestern Sphere of Influence are in an SRA and are classified as high and moderate FHSZs. With the city limits, land is within the LRA. A portion of land in the city limits just north of the southern city limit, where Upland Way and Rainbow Drive meet Fremont Older Open Space Preserve, is classified as Very High FHSZ, as shown on Figure 4.16-1. 23 California Water Science Center, October 2018, Post-Fire Flooding and Debris Flow, United States Geological Survey, accessed June 16, 2023, https://ca.water.usgs.gov/wildfires/wildfires-debris-flow.html. 24 Association of Bay Area Governments, 2023, MTC/ABAG Hazard Viewer Map, Landslide Hazard (Rainfall Induced), accessed June 16, 2023, https://mtc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=4a6f3f1259df42eab29b35dfcd086fc8. 25 US Geological Survey, 2018, How Smoke Fires Can Affect Your Health, accessed on June 16, 2023, https://www.epa.gov/pm-pollution/how-smoke-fires-can-affect-your-health. 26 Nasa Earth Observatory, August 2018, Smoky Skies in North America, accessed on June 16, 2023, https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/92612/smoky-skies-in-north-america. 947
CC 05-14-2024
947 of 1197
Source: City of Cupertino, 2023, CAL FIRE, 2022. 0
Scale (Miles)
1 Figure 4.16-1
Fire Hazard Severity Zones
WILDFIRE
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
C I T Y O F C U P E R T I N O
948
CC 05-14-2024
948 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
4.16-14 APRIL 2024
According to the California Office of Emergency Services, a WUIFA is defined as any area where structures and other human development meet or intermingle within wildland vegetation.27 Unlike wildfire in wildland areas, fires in WUIFAs are more likely to damage or destroy buildings and infrastructure that support populations, the economy, and key services in the city. The City-adopted WUIFAs are shown on Figure 4.16-2, Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Areas. The western and southwestern portions of the city are in high-risk areas, and a small portion of the city on the east border of Fremont Older Open Space Preserve is in a very high risk area. The WUIFA borders unincorporated Santa Clara County. It is zoned as Open Space, Public Park, Recreational Zone (OS/PR), Agricultural Residential (A), and Single Family Residential (R1).
Wildfire History
CAL FIRE maintains a list of historical fires throughout the state. According to CAL FIRE, in the summer of 2007 the Stevens Fire burned 151 acres near Stevens Canyon Reservoir, to the southwest and outside of the Study Area.
28 Factors Influencing Wildfire
Several factors influence wildfire conditions and facilitate the spread of wildfires, including weather conditions, fuels, topography, and climate change. Human actions are the leading cause of wildfires in California, increasing the risk of wildfire devastating natural lands and communities. This section describes these five factors in the context of Cupertino.
Weather
The climate in Cupertino is generally referred to as “Mediterranean,” with hot, dry summers and cool, wet winters. The weather is generally mild throughout the year. Due to the proximity of the Pacific Ocean and San Francisco Bay, fog and overcast conditions are common in the morning and evening.29 The city receives an average of approximately 24 inches of precipitation annually.30 Because the summer months are generally hot and dry, the risk of wildfires has historically been greatest in summer and fall. Relative humidity is also an important fire-related weather factor. As humidity levels drop, the dry air causes vegetation moisture levels to decrease, thereby increasing the likelihood that plant material will readily ignite and burn; the risk of wildfire increases when lightning strikes occur during dry periods.
Wind is a major weather factor of wildfire behavior. Average wind speeds in Cupertino vary only slightly throughout the year, with the windier part of the year from March to July with average wind speeds of
7.6 miles per hour, and the calmer part of the year from August to March with average wind speeds of 27 California Office of Emergency Services, 2018, California State Hazard Mitigation Plan. 28 Santa Clara, County of, October 15, 2017, Santa Clara County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan, accessed June 19, 2023, https://emergencymanagement.sccgov.org/sites/g/files/exjcpb261/files/For%20Partners/Local-Hazard-Mitigation-Plan -LHMP-Vol-1.pdf.
29 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, updated May 2022, San Mateo – Santa Cruz Unit: 2022 Strategic Fire Plan, accessed June 16, 2023, https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/lznihvwb/2022-san-mateo-santa-cruz-san-fransisco-unit-fire -plan.pdf.
30 Cal-Adapt, 2022, Annual Averages, accessed June 16, 2023, https://cal-adapt.org/tools/annual-averages/. 949
CC 05-14-2024
949 of 1197
Source: City of Cupertino, 2023
.
0 Scale (Miles)
1 Figure 4.16-2
Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Areas
WILDFIRE
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
C I T Y O F C U P E R T I N O
950
CC 05-14-2024
950 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
4.16-16 APRIL 2024
6.5 miles per hour.31 Wind is most commonly from the west from February to November, with winds from the north from November to February.32
Diablo winds, which are a type of downslope, warm, northerly to northeasterly wind, flow over the Diablo Mountain range and have had reported speeds of up to 100 miles per hour.33 As wind speeds increase, the rate of fire spread, intensity, and ember spread potential also increases. Gusty and erratic wind conditions can cause a wildfire to spread irregularly, making it difficult to predict its path and effectively deploy fire suppression forces. Winds from the northeast in the late summer and fall compound with lower relative humidity, creating “red flag” conditions.34 Diablo winds and low humidity are especially dangerous because low humidity can dry out trees and other fuel that may also be weakened by the winds. This can increase wildfire conditions in the Study Area. Wind shifts can also occur suddenly due to temperature changes and interactions with steep slopes or hillsides, causing fires to spread unpredictably.
Fall has historically been one of the most dangerous times for wildfire risk, as periods of very high temperatures, low humidity, and strong wind increase, causing “red flag” warnings and extreme fire danger.
Fuel
The qualities of vegetation that directly influence fire risk include fuel type and size, loading, arrangement, chemical composition, and dead and live fuel moisture, which contributes to the flammability characteristics of the vegetation. As shown on Figure 4.3-1 of the General Plan EIR, Vegetation Habitat Types, the Study Area includes 14 habitat types. Forests make up less than 1 percent of the vegetation cover in the Study Area. The majority of vegetation consists of Coastal Oak Woodland (591 acres), Annual Grass (329 acres), Chamise-Redshank Chaparral (298 acres), and Coastal Scrub (168 acres). Grasslands and scrublands are highly flammable, particularly leaf litter that is left to accumulate, ultimately dries, and provides fuel for potential fires. The fire risk in grassland and scrubland vegetation communities can be reduced through several tactics, primarily controlled burns and annual grazing.35 Topography
Slope is a measure of land steepness, and wildfire intensity and rate of spread increase as slope increases due to the tendency of heat from a fire to rise via convection. For example, as slope increases from 20 to 40 percent, flame heights can double, and rates of fire spread can increase fourfold; from 40 to 60 percent, flame can become three times higher and rates of spread can increase eightfold. The arrangement of vegetation throughout a hillside can also contribute to increased fire activity on slopes. As 31 Weatherspark, “Climate and Average Weather Year Round in Cupertino,” accessed January 12, 2024, https://weatherspark.com/y/504/Average-Weather-in-Cupertino-California-United-States-Year-Round. 32 Weatherspark, “Climate and Average Weather Year Round in Cupertino,” accessed January 12, 2024, https://weatherspark.com/y/504/Average-Weather-in-Cupertino-California-United-States-Year-Round. 33 Liu, YC., P. Di, S. H. Chen, et al., November 28, 2020, Climatology of diablo winds in Northern California and their relationships with large-scale climate variabilities, accessed June 16, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-020-05535-5. 34 The National Weather Service issues “red flag” weather day warnings when certain weather elements such as low relative humidity and strong winds could lead to increased wildfire risk. 35 The Nature Conservancy, Restoring Fire to Native Grasslands, accessed January 12, 2024, https://www.nature.org/ en-us/about-us/where-we-work/united-states/minnesota/stories-in-minnesota/restoring-fire-to-native-grasslands/. 951
CC 05-14-2024
951 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 4.16-17
described in Chapter 4.5, Geology, Soils, & Seismicity, of the General Plan EIR, the topography of the Study Area is largely flat, with hilly slopes in the western and southwestern portion of the city. The surrounding foothills at the outskirts of the Study Area include a varied, sloped terrain.
Climate Change
Climate change is likely to increase annual average temperatures in Cupertino from a historical 69.4 degrees Fahrenheit (o
F), to 73.5 oF by 2050 and 76.5oF by 2100.36 This will likely create warmer temperatures earlier and later in the year. Precipitation levels are projected to vary over the course of the century, changing from a historical annual average of 23.7 inches per year, to an annual average of 26.3 inches by 2050 and an annual average of 29.6 inches by 2099.37 Variations in precipitation patterns will also lead to an increase in frequency and intensity of heavy precipitation events as well as prolonged periods of drought. The combination of extreme heat and droughts can cause soils and vegetation to dry out, creating more fuel for wildfires. These factors are expected to increase wildfire conditions, creating a risk of more frequent and intense wildfires. Because wildfires burn the trees and other vegetation that help stabilize a hillside and absorb water, more areas burned by fire may also lead to an increase in landslides and floods. Historically, an average of 101 acres have burned annually in the Study Area.
Wildfires are projected to decrease to an annual average in the Study Area of 88 acres burned by 2050 and an increase in annual average of 105 acres burned by 2100. 38 Human Actions
Most wildfires are ignited by human action, the result of direct acts of arson, carelessness, or accidents.
Many fires originate in populated areas along roads and around homes and are often the result of careless disposal of cigarettes, mowing of dead grass, electrical equipment malfunction, use of equipment, or burning of debris. Recreation areas with increased human activity that are in fire-prone areas also increase the potential for wildfires.
Fire Protection Resources
Fire protection services in Cupertino are provided by Santa Clara County Fire Department (SCCFD), which operates three fire stations in Cupertino:
Cupertino Fire Station at 20215 Stevens Creek Boulevard Monta Vista Fire Station at 22620 Stevens Creek Boulevard Seven Springs Fire Station at 21000 Seven Springs Parkway The Fire Prevention Division provides a comprehensive fire/life safety plan review for land development, new building construction, interior remodel projects, fire suppression and fire alarm systems. In addition, periodic construction inspections are performed to ensure that completed projects conform to both state 36 Cal-Adapt, 2023, Annual Averages, accessed January 12, 2024, https://cal-adapt.org/tools/annual-averages/. 37 Cal-Adapt, 2023, Annual Averages, accessed January 12, 2024, https://cal-adapt.org/tools/annual-averages/. 38 Cal-Adapt, 2023, Wildfire, accessed January 12, 2024, https://cal-adapt.org/tools/wildfire. 952
CC 05-14-2024
952 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
4.16-18 APRIL 2024
and local fire safety regulations. For existing commercial buildings, the Fire Prevention Division provides an annual inspection program that is delivered through both Fire Prevention Division and fire station personnel. Annual inspections are conducted to ensure reasonable compliance with the general and specific fire safety regulations for each occupancy type, as specified in the adopted Fire and Building Codes.
The SCCFD manages and implements a hazardous brush abatement program for hillside areas within its jurisdictional boundaries. In January of each year, homeowners are reminded that they must remove native brush and vegetation from around their homes to create defensible space. The brush abatement program entails inspections of hillside properties by fire crews beginning early April each year. The costs associated with the abatement work are then placed on the property tax bill for that parcel.
Section 4.12, Public Services and Recreation, of the General Plan EIR, provides additional details about fire protection resources and services in Cupertino.
Evacuation and Access
Evacuation routes are designated roadways that allow many people to quickly leave an area due to a potential or imminent disaster. These routes should have sufficient capacity to accommodate the needs of the community, be safely and easily accessible, and allow people to travel far enough away to be safe from emergency conditions.
As shown on Figure 4.16-3, Evacuation Routes, the primary evacuation routes roads and highways that traverse the city include:
Interstate 280
State Route 85
Bellinger Road
De Anza Boulevard
Lawrence Expressway
McClellan Road
North Foothill Boulevard
North Stelling Road
Prospect Road
Rainbow Drive
Stevens Canyon Road
Stevens Creek Boulevard
West Homestead Road
Wolfe Drive
Several residential neighborhoods throughout the Study Area have evacuation constraints, meaning only one road in and out of a neighborhood. Figure 4.16-4, Evacuation-Constrained Residential Areas,39 shows identified evacuation-constrained residential areas throughout the city, including sites within wildfire hazard zones in the western and southwestern portion of the city. 39 Evacuation-constrained areas mean residential parcels that have fewer than two access routes or residential parcels that are more than 0.5 miles away from the nearest evacuation route. This map was created pursuant to SB 99 and California Government Code Section 65302(g)(5).
953
CC 05-14-2024
953 of 1197
Source: City of Cupertino, 2023, OSM, 2023. 0
Scale (Miles)
1 Figure 4.16-3
Evacuation Routes
WILDFIRE
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
C I T Y O F C U P E R T I N O
954
CC 05-14-2024
954 of 1197
Source: USGS, NASA: OpenStreetMaps, City of Cupertino, 2023. 0 Scale (Miles)
1 Figure 4.16-4
Evacuation-Constrained Residential Areas
WILDFIRE
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
C I T Y O F C U P E R T I N O
955
CC 05-14-2024
955 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 4.16-21
4.16.2 Standards of Significance
Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would result in significant wildfire impacts if it would:
Impact of the
Approved Project
(General Plan
2040 EIR)
Impact of the
Proposed
Modified Project
FIRE-1. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? LTS LTS
FIRE-2. Exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? N/A LTS FIRE-3. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) but would not exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
N/A LTS
FIRE-4. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
N/A LTS
FIRE-5. Result in a cumulatively considerable impact with respect to wildfire? N/A LTS In December 2018, amendments were made to Appendix G, Environmental Checklist, of the CEQA Guidelines after the certification of the General Plan EIR in 2015. Some of the questions have been added, modified, or removed, while others have been relocated to different chapters of this EA. Wildfire has been added as a separate impact category to Appendix G, thus this EA analyzes the current wildfire questions in addition to FIRE-4, which was included in the General Plan EIR as HAZ-7. In the General Plan EIR, wildfire impacts were included in Chapter 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
Key: NI = no impact; LTS = less than significant; LTS/M = less than significant with mitigation; SU = significant and unavoidable; N/A = not a standard of significance in the General Plan EIR
4.16.3 Impact Discussion
FIRE-1 Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
As described in the General Plan EIR, Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, potential future development as a result of implementation of the Approved Project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan through compliance with applicable federal, State, and local regulations. Impacts to emergency response planning were found to be less than significant and no mitigation measures were required. However, since the certification of the General Plan EIR, the EOP has been updated, and an evacuation plan through Genasys Protection, formerly known as Zonehaven, has been developed for each of the 34 evacuation zones in Cupertino.
The City of Cupertino Emergency Management Division is responsible for coordinating agency response to disasters or other large-scale emergencies in the City of Cupertino with assistance from the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Services and the SCCFD. The Cupertino EOP is the primary emergency response plan for the city and is described under Section 4.16.1.1, Regulatory Framework. In the event of an emergency, the City would activate personnel and mobilize response assets to support the incident response. During a wildfire, the SCCFD would perform firefighting activities and urban search-and-rescue activities, and the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Department would be responsible for conducting 956
CC 05-14-2024
956 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
4.16-22 APRIL 2024
evacuations. The routes that would be used in the event of an emergency in the plan area are described in Section 4.16.1.2, Existing Conditions.
Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the General Plan EIR found that the Health and Safety (HS) Element contains policies that require local planning and development decisions to consider impacts of development on an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Like the Approved Project, the following existing General Plan 2040 policies, and updated policies as part of the proposed Modified Project, would serve to minimize potential adverse impacts on adopted emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans:
Policy HS-2.1. Promote Emergency Preparedness. Distribute multi-hazard emergency preparedness information for all threats identified in the emergency plan. Information will be provided through Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (CPR), First Aid and Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) training, lectures and seminars on emergency preparedness, publication of monthly safety articles in the Cupertino Scene, posting of information on the Emergency Preparedness website and coordination of video and printed information at the library. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-33) Policy HS-2.2. Emergency Operations Center. Ensure ongoing training of identified City employees on their functions/responsibilities in the EOC and in disaster preparedness, first aid and CPR. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-38)
Policy HS-2.4. Emergency Public Information. Maintain an Emergency Public Information program to be used during emergency situations. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-39) Policy HS-3.2. Early Project Review. Involve the Fire Department in the early design stage of all projects requiring public review to assure Fire Department input and modifications as needed. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-8 and Policy 6-13)
Strategy HS- 3.3.2. Dead- End Street Access. Allow public use of private roadways during an emergency for hillside subdivisions that have dead-end public streets longer than 1,000 feet or find a secondary means of access. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-14) Strategy HS- 3.3.3. Hillside Access Routes. Require new hillside development to have frequent grade breaks in access routes to ensure a timely response from fire personnel. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-15) Strategy HS- 3.3.4. Hillside Road Upgrades. Require new hillside development to upgrade existing access roads to meet Fire Code and City standards. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-16) Policy HS- 3.4. Private Residential Electronic Security Gates. Discourage the use of private residential electronic security gates that act as a barrier to emergency personnel. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-17) Strategy HS- 3.4.2. Access to Gates. Where electronic security gates area allowed, require the installation of an approved key switch to be accessed by the Fire District. Policy HS-3.5. Commercial and Industrial Fire Protection Guidelines. Coordinate with the Fire Department to develop new guidelines for fire protection for commercial and industrial land uses. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-9)
Policy HS-3.6. Fire Prevention and Emergency Preparedness. Promote fire prevention and emergency preparedness through city-initiated public education programs, the government television channel, the Internet and the Cupertino Scene. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-10) The proposed Modified Project would include potential future development and increased housing densities within the same boundaries as the Approved Project. Additionally, the housing opportunity sites under the proposed Modified Project would not be located in a FHSZ or WUIFA. Furthermore, as shown 957
CC 05-14-2024
957 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 4.16-23
on Figure 4-1, Priority Development Areas and Transit Priority Areas, of this EA, the locations of most potential future development under the proposed Modified Project would be in similar areas as those of the Approved Project and would be concentrated on a limited number of parcels and in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized, and/or near existing residential and residential-serving development in developed areas.
As with the future potential development assessed in the General Plan EIR, development under the proposed Modified Project would be required to comply with applicable laws, policies, and design standards, and would be required to comply with the adopted Cupertino EOP and evacuation plans.
Therefore, overall impacts from adoption and implementation of the proposed Modified Project would not result in new or more severe impacts to the implementation of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan beyond what was evaluated in the General Plan EIR.
Significance without Mitigation: Less than significant.
FIRE-2 Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would not, due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire.
While the General Plan EIR did not evaluate whether the Approved Project would expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or uncontrolled spread of a wildfire due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, the General Plan EIR does indicate that implementation of Health and Safety Element policies and strategies, along with compliance with State and local requirements, would have less than significant impacts related to wildland fires.
As described in Section 4.16.1.2, Existing Conditions, the Study Area varies from flat in the eastern portion of the city to steeply sloped in the western and southwestern portions of the city, experiences Diablo Wind events, and has other factors such as highly flammable grass- and herb-dominated fuels. Under the Approved Project, wildfires and associated smoke could potentially travel to the Study Area and expose residents to the uncontrolled spread of wildfire or pollutant concentrations due to slope, prevailing winds, and highly flammable fuels. However, the potential future development under the proposed Modified Project would not exacerbate these impacts compared to the Approved Project.
As described in Impact Discussion FIRE-1, the proposed Modified Project does not include Housing Opportunity Sites in a FHSZ or a WUIFA. Future potential development under both the Approved Project and the proposed Modified Project would also be required to comply with the California Building Code, California Fire Code, Very High FHSZ Fire Safe Regulations, PRC Section 4291, and the CMC, which provide requirements for vegetation and fuel management and development on slopes that reduce wildfire impacts. Although prevailing winds would not change in the Study Area, future potential development under the proposed Modified Project would be required to comply with Chapter 7A of the CBC, which requires ignition-resistant materials and design that would make the structures less prone to exacerbate wildfire risks than the existing structures in the Study Area. Additionally, these regulations have been updated since the approval of the Approved Project, and therefore the proposed Modified Project would 958
CC 05-14-2024
958 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
4.16-24 APRIL 2024
be required to go beyond the requirements of the Approved Project for vegetation and fuel management in the Study Area to reduce wildfire impacts.
Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the General Plan EIR also found that the Health and Safety (HS) Element contains policies that require local planning and development decisions to consider impacts that development could have on exacerbating wildfire risks. Like the Approved Project, the following existing General Plan 2040 policies and strategies, and updated policies and strategies as part of the proposed Modified Project, would also serve to minimize potential for wildfire risk therefore exposing project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire:
Policy HS-1.1. Regional Hazard Risk Reduction Planning. Coordinate with Santa Clara County and local agencies to implement the Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) for Santa Clara County. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-1)
Strategy HS-1.1.1. Monitoring and Budgeting. Monitor and fund the LHMP program, including local strategies provided in the Cupertino Annex (Section 11). Working with Santa Clara County, ensure that strategies are prioritized and implemented through the Capital Improvement Program and provide adequate budget for on-going programs and department operations. (General Plan EIR Strategy 1) Strategy HS-1.1.2. Mitigation Incorporation. Ensure that mitigation actions identified in the LHMP are being incorporated into upcoming City sponsored projects, where appropriate. (General Plan EIR Strategy 2)
Policy HS- 3.1. Regional Coordination. Coordinate wildland fire prevention efforts with adjacent jurisdictions. Encourage the County and the Midpeninsula Open Space District to implement measures to reduce fire hazards, including putting into effect the fire reduction policies of the County Public Safety Element, continuing efforts in fuel management, and considering the use of “green” fire break uses for open space lands. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-4, Policy 6-6, and Policy 6-7) Policy HS-3.2. Early Project Review. Involve the Fire Department in the early design stage of all projects requiring public review to assure Fire Department input and modifications as needed. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-8)
Policy HS-3.5. Commercial and Industrial Fire Protection Guidelines. Coordinate with the Fire Department to develop new guidelines for fire protection for commercial and industrial land uses. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-9)
Policy HS- 3.7. Multi-Story Buildings. Ensure that adequate fire protection is built into the design of multi-story buildings and require on-sire fire suppression materials and equipment. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-11)
As with the future potential development assessed in the General Plan EIR, future potential development under the proposed Modified Project would be required to comply with applicable State and local laws, policies, and design standards. Therefore, overall impacts from adoption and implementation of the proposed Modified Project would not result in new or a substantial increase in magnitude of impacts due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, that would exacerbate wildfire risks and expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire compared to the Approved Project.
Significance without Mitigation: Less than significant. 959
CC 05-14-2024
959 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 4.16-25
FIRE-3 Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) but would not exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment.
Though the General Plan EIR did not evaluate whether the Approved Project would exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment due to the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities), the General Plan EIR does indicate that implementation of the Approved Project would have less than significant impacts related to wildland fires.
Buildout under the Approved Project and proposed Modified Project could require the installation of new roadways, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, and other utilities to serve development in the Study Area.
Roadways. The proposed Modified Project does not include new roadways in the Very High FHSZ.
Potential future development under the proposed Modified Project could, however, create new or expanded roadways in the western, fire-prone areas of the Study Area. Similar to future potential roadways under the Approved Project, State Very High FHSZ Fire Safe Regulations would prevent structures from being placed within 30 feet of a roadway, reducing the potential for new roadways to exacerbate wildfire risks.
Fuel Breaks. As described in Impact Discussion FIRE-2, the Health and Safety (HS) Element of the Approved Project includes Policy HS-3.1 which includes coordination with regional jurisdictions to continue fuel management and use of “green” fire breaks on open space lands. This policy would still be in place as part of the proposed Modified Project.
Emergency Water Sources. The Health and Safety (HS) Element of the Approved Project includes the Policy HS-3.8, which encourages cooperation between the water utility companies and Fire Department to keep water systems in pace with growth and firefighting service needs. This policy would still be in place as part of the proposed Modified Project. Power Lines. Potential future development under the proposed Modified Project could require electrical line installations and connections to provide power to buildings and infrastructure. However, similar to the Approved Project, the potential future development under the proposed Modified Project would be required to comply with Infrastructure (INF) Element Strategy INF-2.4.2, which requires undergrounding of all utility lines in new developments, which would minimize wildfire risks associated with power lines.
Other Utilities. Potential future development under both the Approved Project and proposed Modified project could also require the installation and maintenance of water systems, sewer systems, internet infrastructure, and stormwater systems. However, the proposed Modified Project does not include land use changes or allow for future potential residential development in wildfireprone areas. 960
CC 05-14-2024
960 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
4.16-26 APRIL 2024
These types of improvements would involve temporary construction and result in changes to existing conditions under both the Approved Project and proposed Modified Project. The installation of roadways, power lines, and other utilities could increase the risk of wildfire; however, the proposed Modified Project does not include future potential development in wildfire-prone areas of the Study Area. Additionally, development under the proposed Modified Project would be required to comply with the most recent CBC, CFC, Very High VHSZ Fire Safe Regulations, and Cupertino Municipal Code, which provide specific measures to minimize the ignition and spread of wildfires due to infrastructure. The State and local regulations are stricter than those evaluated under the General Plan EIR.
Given compliance with State and local regulations, the proposed Modified Project would not require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, or other utilities) that would result in new or substantially more severe fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment when compared to the Approved Project.
Significance without Mitigation: Less than significant.
FIRE-4 Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would not expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes.
While the General Plan EIR did not evaluate whether the Approved Project would expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes, the General Plan EIR does indicate that implementation of the Approved Project, specifically in the wildfire-prone areas, would have less than significant impacts related to wildland fires. Additionally, the General Plan EIR indicates the Approved Project would not expose people or structure to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flood hazards, and therefore impacts related to flood hazards were found to be less than significant. The General Plan EIR also indicates that the Approved Project would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects due to landslides or slope instability.
As described in General Plan EIR Chapter 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, a small portion of the Study Area is within the 100-year floodplain, including areas immediately adjacent to Permanente Creek, Stevens Creek, Calabazas Creek, and Saratoga Creek. Most of the western and central areas of the Study Area are within the 500-year floodplain. As described in the General Plan EIR, Chapter 4.5, Geology, Soils, and Seismicity, the southwestern portion of the Study Area is highly susceptible to landslides. The high landslide susceptibility areas coincide with lands designated as Very High FHSZs.
Both the Approved Project and the proposed Modified Project would include residential development within the 500-year floodplain. Similarly, although the Approved Project would include development in areas of high landslide susceptibility, the proposed Modified Project would not. The proposed Modified Project would also be required to comply with the most recent version of the CBC, CFC, and CMC. These regulations would ensure fire-, floodplain-, and landslide-resilient construction of potential future 961
CC 05-14-2024
961 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
PLACEWORKS 4.16-27
development, and therefore would reduce the potential for post-wildfire flooding or landslides downstream or downslope.
Chapter 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality and Chapter 4.5, Geology, Soils, and Seismicity, of the General Plan EIR also found that the Environmental Resources and Sustainability (ES) and Health and Safety (HS) Elements contain policies that require local planning and development decisions to consider impacts that development could have on exposing people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes.
Like the Approved Project, the following existing General Plan 2040 policies and strategies, and updated policies and strategies as part of the proposed Modified Project, would also serve to minimize potential adverse impacts due to runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes:
Policy ES-5.3. Landscaping In and Near Natural Vegetation. Preserve and enhance existing natural vegetation, landscape features and open space when new development is proposed within existing natural areas. When development is proposed near natural vegetation, encourage the landscaping to be consistent with the palate of vegetation found in the natural vegetation. (General Plan EIR Policy 5- 10)
Policy ES-7.2. Reduction of Impervious Surfaces. Minimize storm water flow and erosion impacts resulting from development and use low impact development (LID) designs to treat stormwater or recharge groundwater. (General Plan EIR Policy 5-19)
Policy ES-7.3. Pollution and Flow Impacts. Ensure that surface and groundwater quality impacts are reduced through development review and voluntary efforts. (General Plan EIR Policy 5-20) Strategy ES- 7.3.1. Development Review. Require LID designs such as vegetated stormwater treatment systems and green infrastructure to mitigate pollutant loads and flows. (General Plan EIR Strategy 1) Policy ES- 7.5. Groundwater Recharge Sites. Support the Santa Clara Valley Water District efforts to find and develop groundwater recharge sites within Cupertino and provide public recreation where possible. (General Plan EIR Policy 5-23)
Strategy ES-7.8.1. Inter-Agency Coordination. Work with the Santa Clara Valley Water District and other relevant regional agencies to enhance riparian corridors and provide adequate flood control by use of flow increase mitigation measures, such as hydromodification controls as established by the Municipal Regional Permit. (General Plan EIR Strategy 2) Policy HS- 7.5. Hillside Grading. Restrict the extent and timing of hillside grading operation to April through October except as otherwise allowed by the City. Require performance bonds during the remaining time to guarantee the repair of any erosion damage. Require all graded slopes must be planted as soon as practical after grading is complete. (General Plan EIR Policy 6-47) Implementation of future potential development under the proposed Modified Project would not expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes, or result in new impacts or a substantial increase in magnitude of impacts when compared to the Approved Project.
Significance without Mitigation: Less than significant. 962
CC 05-14-2024
962 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
WILDFIRE
4.16-28 APRIL 2024
FIRE-5 Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would not result in a cumulatively considerable impact with respect to wildfire.
The analysis of cumulative wildfire impacts is based on impacts of the proposed Modified Project plus cumulative development in the City of Cupertino and the surrounding region. Future projects proposed within the Very High FHSZ or WUIFA could subject people and structures to wildfire hazards. As described previously, the proposed Modified Project would not result in new impacts or a substantial increase in magnitude of impacts related to interfering with implementation of emergency response or evacuation plans; exacerbating wildfire risks exposing project occupants to pollutant concentrations or the uncontrolled spread of wildfire; exacerbating fire risks or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment due to the installation or maintenance of infrastructure; or exposing people or structures to significant risks as a results of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes when compared to the Approved Project.
The addition of other potential future development projects in the Study Area and surrounding region would have the potential to contribute to cumulative wildfire risks. However, future potential development in the Study Area and surrounding region in the Very High FHSZ or WUIFA would be subject to the same State and local regulations, including the CBC, CFC, Very High FHSZ Fire Safe Regulations, and CMC. Potential future development projects would be required to undergo separate CEQA review and identify wildfire impacts and appropriate mitigation measures. Therefore, cumulative wildfire impacts would be less than significant.
Significance without Mitigation: Less than significant. 963
CC 05-14-2024
963 of 1197
5-1 APRIL 2024
Alternatives to the Proposed Modified
Project
The following discussion is intended to inform the public and decision makers of feasible alternatives to the proposed Modified Project that would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the proposed project. Section 15126.6, Consideration and Discussion of Alternatives to the Proposed Project, of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines states that:
An EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project.
Rather it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision making and public participation. An EIR is not required to consider alternatives, which are infeasible. The lead agency is responsible for selecting a range of project alternatives for examination and must publicly disclose its reasoning for selecting those alternatives. There is no ironclad rule governing the nature or scope of the alternatives to be discussed other than the rule of reason.
5.1 PURPOSE
The alternatives evaluated in this Draft EA were developed consistent with Section 15126.6(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that:
Because an EIR must identify ways to mitigate or avoid the significant effects that a project may have on the environment (Public Resources Code Section 21002.1), the discussion of alternatives shall focus on alternatives to the project or its location which are capable of avoiding or substantially lessening any significant effects of the project, even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly.
5.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
As stated, the range of potential alternatives to the proposed project shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic objectives of the proposed project. As listed in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this Draft EA, the City has identified the following objectives, which build on the framework of the Vision and Values and reflect the community’s desires for the future of Cupertino and will serve as the project objectives for the EA.
964
CC 05-14-2024
964 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
5-2 APRIL 2024
Update the General Plan’s Housing Element to comply with State-mandated housing requirements and to address the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing in the city between 2023 and 2031.
Include an adequate inventory of housing sites and rezone the sites as necessary to meet the required Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) and to provide an appropriate buffer. To affirmatively further fair housing (AFFH).
Incentivize the development of housing, particularly affordable housing, suited to special needs and all income levels.
Promote a healthy and sustainable Cupertino through support of housing at all income levels that minimizes reliance on natural resources and automobile use. Update the City’s Zoning Code and Land Use and Community Design General Plan Element to be consistent with the Housing Element pursuant to Government Code Section 65300.5 (internal consistency) and Government Code Section 65860 (vertical consistency), respectively. Update the City’s General Plan Mobility Element to minimize environmental impacts associated with implementation of the Housing Element and be consistent with updated State law and guidance for vehicle miles traveled.
Update the Heart of the City Specific Plan to be consistent with the Housing Element pursuant to Government Code Section 65860 (vertical consistency).
5.3 SELECTION OF A REASONABLE RANGE OF ALTERNATIVES
Section 15126.6(c) of the CEQA Guidelines states:
The range of potential alternatives to the proposed project shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic objectives of the project and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects. The EIR should briefly describe the rationale for selecting the alternatives to be discussed. The EIR should also identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination. Additional information explaining the choice of alternatives may be included in the administrative record. Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in an EIR are: (i) failure to meet most of the basic project objectives, (ii) infeasibility, or (iii) inability to avoid significant environmental impacts.
5.3.1 ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
Two project alternatives and the comparative merits of the alternatives are described in this chapter in accordance with the CEQA Guidelines. All the potential environmental impacts associated with adoption and implementation of the proposed Modified Project were found to be either less than significant without mitigation or less than significant with mitigation, except for impacts to air quality (AIR), greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), and transportation (TRANS), which were found to be significant and unavoidable at the program level. Although the proposed Modified Project results in significant and unavoidable impacts, the identification of these program-level impacts do not preclude the finding of lessthan-significant impacts for subsequent development proposals analyzed at the project level that do not 965
CC 05-14-2024
965 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
PLACEWORKS 5-3
exceed the applicable project-level thresholds. The program-level significant and unavoidable impacts include the following:
Impact AIR-1: Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would conflict with the growth assumptions under Plan Bay Area 2040 that are applied to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD) 2017 Clean Air Plan, the proposed Modified Project would therefore conflict with the air quality emissions forecast in the BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan. Impact AIR-2: Operation of development projects that could occur from implementation of the proposed Modified Project would generate emissions that would exceed Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s regional significance thresholds for Reactive Organic Gases (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), coarse inhalable particulate matter (PM10), and fine inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5). Impact AIR-5: The emissions that could occur over the buildout horizon of the proposed Modified Project could generate a substantial increase in emissions that exceeds the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s significance thresholds and cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations and health risk in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. Impact GHG-1: Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would exceed the net zero greenhouse gas emission threshold under Executive Order B-55-18. Impact GHG-2: The proposed Modified Project would not meet California Green Building Standards Code nonresidential voluntary Tier 2 electric vehicle parking standards and would exceed the City of Cupertino’s vehicle miles traveled reduction threshold, and therefore be inconsistent with the California Air Resources Board Scoping Plan.
Impact GHG-3: The proposed Modified Project would result in vehicle miles traveled that would exceed the City of Cupertino’s reduction target, and therefore conflict with the California Air Resources Board Scoping Plan and Executive Order B-55-18. Impact TRANS-2: Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would exceed the adopted Cupertino vehicle miles traveled (VMT) threshold per service population of 31.30 VMT by 3.5 VMT per service population, due to forecasted growth through 2040. Impact TRANS-5: Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would cumulatively contribute to regional vehicle miles traveled.
The alternatives were selected because of their potential to further reduce and avoid these impacts. The alternatives to be analyzed in comparison to the proposed project include:
Alternative A: No Project Alternative (Current General Plan 2040) and Alternative B: Increased Housing Sites Alternative.
The first alternative is the CEQA-required “No Project” Alternative, which assumes the current General Plan 2040 remains in effect and is not replaced by the proposed Modified Project. Alternative B assumes additional housing units would be allowed on parcels with commercial land uses along Stevens Creek Boulevard and De Anza Boulevard.
5.3.2 ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODOLOGY
The alternatives analysis is presented as a comparative analysis to the proposed Modified Project. The development intensity for the alternatives varies from the proposed Modified Project. The estimated growth under each alternative, as well as the proposed Modified Project, is provided in Table 5-1, Total 966
CC 05-14-2024
966 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
5-4 APRIL 2024
Forecasted Growth for the Proposed Modified Project and the Alternatives to the Proposed Modified Project.
TABLE 5-1 TOTAL FORECASTED GROWTH FOR THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT AND THE ALTERNATIVES TO THE
PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
Category
Proposed
Modified Project
Alternative A:
No Project
Alternative B:
Increased Housing Sites
Housing Units a 29,132 25,820 30,119
Population b 81,037 71,300 83.939
Jobs 44,242 44,242 44,242
Notes:
a. Total housing units accommodated under the proposed Modified Project, Alternative A, and Alternative B. b. Total population accommodated under the proposed Modified Project, Alternative A, and Alternative B.
Source: City of Cupertino, 2024.
The alternatives analysis assumes that all applicable mitigation measures recommended for the proposed project and the proposed General Plan 2040 goals, policies, and strategies would apply to Alternative B, but would not apply to Alternative A. The following discussion compares the environmental impacts of the alternatives with those of the proposed Modified Project for each of the environmental topics analyzed in detail in Chapter 4, Environmental Analysis, of this Draft EA. The impacts of each alternative are classified as less than (<), similar or comparable to (=), or greater than (>) the level of impacts associated with the proposed project. Table 5-2, Comparison of Impacts of the Project Alternatives and the Proposed Modified Project, summarizes the relative impacts of each of the alternatives compared to the proposed project.
TABLE 5-2 COMPARISON OF IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT ALTERNATIVES AND THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT Topic
Proposed
Project a
Alternative A:
No Project
Alternative B:
Increased Housing Sites
Aesthetics LTS = =
Air Quality SU < <
Biological Resources LTS = =
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources LTS = =
Energy LTS < =
Geology and Soils LTS = =
Greenhouse Gas Emissions SU < <
Hazards and Hazardous Materials LTS = =
Hydrology and Water Quality LTS < >
Land Use and Planning LTS > =
Noise LTS < <
Population and Housing LTS > =
Public Services and Recreation LTS < >
Transportation SU > <
Utilities and Service Systems LTS < >
Wildfire LTS = =
Note:
a. The impacts listed in this column represent the highest significance determination for each respective standard of significance.
LTS Less Than Significant
LTS/M Less Than Significant with Mitigation
SU Significant and Unavoidable
< Fewer impact in comparison to the proposed project
= Similar impact in comparison to the proposed project
> Greater impact in comparison to the proposed project
967
CC 05-14-2024
967 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
PLACEWORKS 5-5
5.4 ALTERNATIVE A: NO PROJECT
5.4.1 DESCRIPTION
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(1), the No Project Alternative is required as part of the “reasonable range of alternatives” to allow decision makers to compare the impacts of approving the proposed project with the impacts of taking no action or not approving the proposed project. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(A), when the project is the revision of a plan, as in this case, the no project alternative will be the continuation of the existing plan. Under Alternative A, potential future development in Cupertino would continue to be subject to existing policies, regulations, development standards, and land use designations of the existing General Plan 2040.
5.4.2 IMPACT DISCUSSION
The potential environmental impacts associated with Alternative A when compared to the proposed Modified Project are described herein.
AESTHETICS
As described in Chapter 4.1, Aesthetics, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant impacts related to aesthetics. Like the proposed Modified Project, potential future development in the Study Area under Alternative A is anticipated to occur in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized, and/or in close proximity to existing development, where future development would have a lesser impact on scenic vistas. General Plan 2040 reinforces existing uses, heights, and densities in most locations, and therefore would not substantially increase building height beyond what is previously accounted for under Approved Project.
The westward views of the foothills and ridgelines of the Santa Cruz Mountains are considered scenic vistas and the Caltrans designated segment of Interstate 280 (I-280) from Santa Clara County line on the west to I-880 on the east, as an eligible State Scenic Highway is a scenic corridor. Potential future development under either scenario would occur in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized. Therefore, implementation of either scenario would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista or damage existing scenic resources within a state scenic highway and impacts would be similar.
Applicable future projects under both scenarios would be subject to the Architectural and Site Review process, in accordance with CMC Chapter 19.168, Architectural and Site Review, or would be required to comply with Design Standards outlined in the General Plan, Heart of the City Specific Plan, or other appropriate Conceptual Plans, the Monta Vista Design Guidelines, or the South Vallco Specific Plan.
However, Alternative A would not realize the new or modified General Plan 2040 goals, policies, or strategies that were prepared as part of the proposed Modified Project. For example, a new policy requires views of the Montebello foothills to be preserved. Thus, unlike the proposed Modified Project, which includes this new policy, development under this alternative would not provide the same level of design consideration related to the visual character or quality of a project site near Montebello Foothills; 968
CC 05-14-2024
968 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
5-6 APRIL 2024
thus, aesthetic impacts related to these topics from potential development under Alternative A would be greater when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
Similar to the proposed Modified Project, Alternative A would result in new lighting sources that could result in sources of glare. Potential future development under both scenarios would be required to comply with best management practices in CALGreen and Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC) that ensure new land uses do not generate excessive light levels and reduce light and glare spillover from future development to surrounding land uses. Because Alternative A would result in less development than the proposed Modified Project, fewer new light and glare sources would be introduced, and impacts would be less when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
Overall, while Alternative A would not realize the new or modified General Plan 2040 goals, policies, or strategies that were prepared as part of the proposed Modified Project, development in the Study Area under Alternative A would be less and would be guided by the current policies and regulations that guide development in Cupertino. Thus, impacts related to aesthetics would be similar when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
AIR QUALITY
As described in Chapter 4.2, Air Quality, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts even with implementation of the Standard Environmental Protection Requirements. Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would have the potential to exceed Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) significance thresholds for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOx), coarse inhalable particulate matter (PM10), and fine inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5), as well as conflict with the BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan.
Alternative A would continue development as allowed under the Approved Project, which would result in less development in the Study Area compared to the proposed Modified Project. Development under both scenarios would be subject to applicable laws and regulations, including those under Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC) Section 17.04.040, Standard Environmental Protection Technical Report Submittal Requirements, and Section 17.04.050, Standard Environmental Protection Permit Submittal Requirements.
Additionally, future development under both scenarios could result in construction activities near residential and other sensitive land uses, thus, temporarily elevating concentrations of toxic air contaminants in the vicinity of sensitive land uses. While the regulatory setting mitigating construction impacts is the same under both scenarios, less development would occur under Alternative A; therefore, construction impacts would be fewer when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
Under Alternative A, less development would occur; therefore, fewer direct and indirect criteria air pollutant emissions from energy (e.g., natural gas use) and area sources (e.g., aerosols and landscaping equipment) would occur. Therefore, the operational air quality impacts of Alternative A would be less when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
Like the proposed Modified Project, Alternative A is not the type of project that would result in significant impacts from odor and impacts would be similar under both scenarios. 969
CC 05-14-2024
969 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
PLACEWORKS 5-7
Overall, air quality impacts under Alternative A would be fewer when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
As described in Chapter 4.4, Biological Resources, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would result in less-than-significant impacts to biological resources. The Study Area is not within any local, regional, or State Habitat Conservation Plan areas. Therefore, neither scenario would conflict with the conservation strategy in any Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation Plan and impacts would be similar.
Potential future development under both scenarios would occur in already urbanized areas on sites either already developed and/or underutilized, and/or near existing development without sensitive natural communities and where special-status species are generally not expected to occur. Accordingly, impacts to these biological resources under Alternative A would be similar when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
Impacts to the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors under both scenarios would be mitigated. Under both Alternative A and the proposed Modified Project, potential future development would be required to comply with the Standard Environmental Protection Requirements under CMC Section 17.04.050, Standard Environmental Protection Permit Submittal Requirements. Thus, impacts to biological resources from potential future development as allowed under Alternative A would be similar when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
As described in Chapter 4.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would result in less-than-significant impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources.
Under Alternative A, new development would continue throughout the city under existing plans and regulations. As explained in Chapter 4.4, there are existing prehistoric, architectural, historical, or archaeological resources in the Study Area that could all be impacted by new demolition, inappropriate modification, or inappropriate new construction under the proposed Modified Project or Alternative A.
Like the proposed Modified Project, Alternative A would be subject to the procedures of conduct following the discovery of human remains set forth in California Health and Safety Code, Public Resources Code, and the California Code of Regulations, as well as the policies and strategies in General Plan 2040.
Additionally, future potential development under both the proposed Modified Project and Alternative A would be required to comply with CMC Section 17.04.050, Standard Environmental Protection Permit Submittal Requirements. Development in both scenarios would occur on previously disturbed sites and/or near existing development where buried cultural and tribal cultural resources may be less common.
Though less development would occur under the Alternative A scenario, the development would occur in similar locations as under the proposed Modified Project, and the potential to impact these resources would be similar when compared to the proposed project. 970
CC 05-14-2024
970 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
5-8 APRIL 2024
ENERGY
As described in Chapter 4.5, Energy, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant impacts related to energy.
All development that occurs in the state is required to comply with best management practices regulated in the CALGreen and Building and Energy Efficiency Standards, which ensure new development would not result in the wasteful or inefficient use of energy. Additionally, neither the proposed Modified Project nor Alternative A would introduce a level of development and population growth that would be anticipated to necessitate the construction of new energy supply facilities or transmission infrastructure.
Less development would occur under the Alternative A scenario, so energy consumption from construction would be less when compared to the proposed Modified Project. The energy efficiency standards in place for new development would ensure that operational energy consumption under the Alternative A scenario would be similar to consumption under the proposed Modified Project. Therefore, overall energy demand and consumption would be less under Alternative A when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
As described in Chapter 4.6, Geology and Soils, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would result in less-than-significant impacts related to geology and soils.
Future development under both Alternative A and the proposed Modified Project would be subject to the same federal, State, and local regulations that address and prevent hazards associated with geology, soils, and seismicity. Both the Approved Project and proposed Modified Project encourage development in urbanized settings where there is less likelihood for impacts from geologic hazards to occur and include General Plan 2040 policies and strategies that minimize adverse effects to geologic processes, soil erosion, and loss of topsoil. Although Alternative A would result in less overall development, compliance with existing regulations related to geologic and seismic safety would apply similarly to both future development under Alternative A and the proposed Modified Project. Thus, Alternative A would result in similar impacts when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
As described in Chapter 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and would not be consistent with the GHG emissions thresholds set by Executive Order B-55-18 and the California Air Resources Board Scoping Plan.
There would be less development under the Alternative A scenario, though the development under the proposed Modified Project would be limited to infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized, and/or near existing residential and residential-serving development. However, due to the increase in development, exceedance of the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) threshold, and increase in 971
CC 05-14-2024
971 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
PLACEWORKS 5-9
population under the proposed Modified Project, overall impacts from GHG emissions under Alternative A would be less when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
As described in Chapter 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. Cupertino is not within two miles of a public airport or within any protected airspace zones defined by the Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), and there are no private airstrips or heliports listed by FAA in Cupertino, thus there would be no impact under either scenario.
As described in Chapter 4.8, there are sites within the Study Area that are included on a list of hazardous materials sites. Impact Discussion HAZ-3 and HAZ-4 of this Draft EA concluded that implementation of the proposed Modified Project could result in the release of hazardous materials within one-quarter mile of school and construction and operation activities on sites with known hazardous materials and, as a result, create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. However, compliance with CMC Chapter
17.04.040(B), Hazardous Materials, in addition to applicable laws, policies, and design standards governing the release of hazardous materials would results in a less-than-significant impacts under both the Approved Project and the proposed Modified Project. Additionally, implementation of either scenarios would require the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
The proposed Modified Project and Alternative A would include the same General Plan 2040 policies to minimize potential adverse impacts on residential projects within an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Thus, impacts under the Alternative A scenario would be similar to the proposed Modified Project.
Because there is less development potential under Alterative A, the risk associated with construction hazards and hazardous materials is less than under the proposed Modified Project. However, overall impacts would be similar when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
As described in Chapter 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality. Compliance with existing State and local regulations and procedures would ensure that pre- and post-construction impacts to water quality would be less than significant. These regulations and procedures would be maintained under Alternative A.
Potential future development under both scenarios would occur within previously urbanized areas and would connect to existing drainage systems already in place. Alternative A involves less development potential, less ground disturbance and potential change in drainage patterns, and less water use from groundwater sources. As such, impacts to hydrology and water quality would be lesser when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
972
CC 05-14-2024
972 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
5-10 APRIL 2024
LAND USE AND PLANNING
As described in Chapter 4.10, Land Use and Planning, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would result in less-than-significant impacts to land use and planning.
The Approved Project was adopted with the purpose of harmonizing changes to existing developed areas to better serve community needs. Both the proposed Modified Project and Alternative A would aim to improve connectivity and would not create physical barriers within existing communities. They would also both support the integration of infill development and would not propose physical features that could divide a community. Accordingly, impacts would be similar under both scenarios.
Under Alternative A, development would continue to occur throughout the Study Area under Approved Project and would not conflict with these already approved standards. However, Alternative A would not implement new or modified General Plan 2040 goals, policies, and strategies, and would not include the rezoning of parcels to be consistent with the General Plan, included in the proposed Modified Project.
Further, the proposed Modified Project includes forecasted housing projection that meets the City’s 2023–2031 Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA), as well as additional housing projections that would accommodate the following RHNA cycles throughout the buildout horizon, to support the mandatory future Housing Element updates. The proposed Modified Project would also include the rezoning or properties to increase consistency between the General Plan land use designations and Zoning Code. Thus, continuing the use of only the Approved Project would conflict with applicable the land use plans adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect and impacts would be greater when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
NOISE
As described in Chapter 4.11, Noise, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would result in lessthan-significant impacts to noise. The Study Area is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, and therefore would have no impact related to airport or aircraft noise.
Under Alternative A, development would continue to occur throughout the Study Area under Approved Project, which would include less noise from construction, traffic, or other sources that would increase ambient noise levels. However, both the proposed Modified Project and Alternative A would be required to comply with CMC Chapter 10.48, Community Noise Control, Section 17.04.040(D)(1), Vibration Technical Report Requirements, and Section 17.04.050(G)(1), Noise and Vibration Permit Requirements, as well as federal, State, and local regulations related to temporary and operational noise.
Because there is less development potential under Alterative A, overall temporary and operational noise impacts would be less than under the proposed Modified Project.
POPULATION AND HOUSING
As described in Chapter 4.12, Population and Housing, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant impacts related to population and housing. 973
CC 05-14-2024
973 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
PLACEWORKS 5-11
Alternative A would not include the additional housing opportunity sites included in the proposed Modified Project that are required to meet the 2023-2031 RHNA. Additionally, Alternative A would not include the updated policy framework of the proposed Modified Project that ensure adequate planning occurs to accommodate the project growth of the city. Therefore, impacts under Alternative A would be greater when compared to those under the proposed Modified Project.
PUBLIC SERVICES
As described in Chapter 4.13, Public Services, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant impacts related to fire protection services, police services, parks, schools, and libraries.
Alternative A would result in less housing and thus fewer residents in the Study Area. Therefore, the Alternative A scenario would result in less demand for public services provided in the Study Area.
Potential future development under Alternative A would be required to comply with all existing City regulations adopted to ensure that development pays its fair share of the cost of delivering services, providing park space and libraries, while payment of property taxes would ensure that future development pays its fair share towards schools. Overall, impacts under Alternative A would be less than those of the proposed Modified Project.
TRANSPORTATION
As described in Chapter 4.14, Transportation, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in significant impacts related to conflicting with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, increasing hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses, or inadequate emergency access. However, the proposed Modified Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to an increase in VMT beyond the City’s adopted threshold.
Alternative A would result in less housing and thus fewer residents in the Study Area. Therefore, similar to the proposed Modified Project, Alternative A would not result in significant impacts related to conflicting with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, increasing hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses, or inadequate emergency access. Additionally, future potential development under both the proposed Modified Project and Alternative A would be required to comply with CMC Section 17,04.040(C), Vehicle Miles Traveled Technical Report Requirements, and CMC Chapter 17.08, Evaluation of Transportation Impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act, as well as federal, State, regional, and local regulations related to transportation.
As described in Chapter 4.14 of this EA, Table 9, Total Project Generated VMT Assessment, of Appendix E, Transportation Analysis, of this EA, shows that the proposed Modified Project would generate 34.8 VMT per service population (sum of all residents and employees), which is 1.76 VMT per service population less than the Approved Project. Accordingly, Alternative A would have worse impacts related to VMT compared to the proposed Modified Project. Therefore, overall impacts under Alternative A would be greater than those of the proposed Modified Project.
974
CC 05-14-2024
974 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
5-12 APRIL 2024
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
As described in Chapter 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant impacts related to water, wastewater, stormwater, or energy infrastructure and services.
Demand and consumption trends generally demonstrate that advances in recycling and solid waste reduction requirements, water-efficient regulations in building and landscaping, and stricter stormwater retention requirements, would reduce impacts under both the proposed Modified Project and Alternative A. It is assumed that because Alternative A would result in less overall development than the proposed Modified Project, there would be less overall water demand, wastewater and solid waste generation, and energy use. Future potential development under both the proposed Modified Project and Alternative A would be required to comply with federal, State, regional, and local regulations for managing stormwater during construction and operation of projects, including CMC Section 17.04.050(F), Control Stormwater Runoff Contamination. Thus, impacts under Alternative A would be less than those of the proposed Modified Project.
WILDFIRE
As described in Chapter 4.16, Wildfire, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant wildfire impacts. Due to compliance with applicable local, regional, and State regulations, development under both scenarios would not impair the implementation of an emergency response or emergency evacuation plan or be within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone or a Wildland Urban Interface Fire Area, nor would either scenario expose people or structures to significant wildfire risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides. Neither scenario would result in the installation or maintenance of any infrastructure that could exacerbate fire risk or result in impacts to the environment.
Alternative A would continue implementation of the Approved Project, including the General Plan policies and strategies listed in Chapter 4.16. Therefore, potential future development under the Alternative A scenario would have similar wildfire impacts when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
5.4.3 RELATIONSHIP OF THE ALTERNATIVE TO THE OBJECTIVES Under Alternative A, the Approved Project would remain in place and the proposed Modified Project would not be implemented; therefore, this alternative would not accomplish any of the project objectives. 975
CC 05-14-2024
975 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
PLACEWORKS 5-13
5.5 ALTERNATIVE B: INCREASED HOUSING SITES
5.5.1 DESCRIPTION
The purpose of this alternative is to reduce significant and unavoidable impacts associated with vehicle miles travelled as evaluated in the Chapter 4.14, Transportation, of this EA. Alternative B would demonstrate increased compliance with Plan Bay Area 2050, the Bay Area’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)/Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) that identifies the sustainable vision for the Bay Area, than the proposed Modified Project. Alternative B assumes all the proposed amendments to the General Plan 2040 and Zoning Code would occur. The housing sites identified under the proposed Modified Project would remain, but there would be additional housing sites. These sites would include those that comply with the Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act, commonly known by its legislative bill number, Assembly Bill 2011 (AB 2011), that was adopted in August 2020. In general, the intent of AB 2011 is to make affordable housing by right on commercially zoned lands, and mixed-income housing by right along commercial corridors. This alternative would focus increased residential density along Stevens Creek Boulevard and South De Anza Boulevard, which are Priority Development Areas (PDA) and Transit Priority Areas (TPA) of Plan Bay Area 2050. This would include an additional 18 housing sites totaling 987 additional housing units, as shown in Table 5-3, Alternative B: Increased Housing Sites. As shown in Figure 5-1, Alternative B: Increased Housing Sites, the majority of the additional housing sites would be within the boundaries of the high-transit corridor along Stevens Creek Boulevard (922 additional dwelling units) and two additional sites would be on South De Anza Boulevard (65 additional dwelling units). The alternatives analysis assumes that all applicable mitigation measures and General Plan goals, policies, and strategies recommended for the proposed Modified Project would apply to Alternative B. The potential environmental impacts associated with Alternative B when compared to the proposed Modified Project are described herein.
5.5.2 IMPACT DISCUSSION
AESTHETICS
As described in Chapter 4.1, Aesthetics, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant impacts related to aesthetics. Like the proposed Modified Project, potential future development in the Study Area under Alternative B is anticipated to occur in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized, and/or near existing development, where future development would have a lesser impact on scenic vistas. General Plan 2040 reinforces existing uses, heights, and densities in most locations, and therefore would not substantially increase building height beyond what is previously accounted for under Approved Project. 976
CC 05-14-2024
976 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
5-14 APRIL 2024
TABLE 5-3 ALTERNATIVE B: INCREASED HOUSING SITES
Site
No.
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
Size
(acres) Neighborhood
General Plan
Land Use Designation Zoning District
Maximum Density
(dwelling units/acre) a
Maximum Dwelling Units
Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Net New b A 36610127 0.86 South De Anza Commercial/
Residential
Very High
Density
P(CG, Res
5-15) P(Res) 15 65 13 56 43
B 36619044 0.44 South De Anza Commercial/
Residential
Very High
Density
P(CG, Res
5-15) P(Res) 15 65 7 29 22
C 36619045 0.07 South De Anza Commercial/
Residential
Very High
Density
P(CG, Res
5-15) P(Res) 15 65 1 5 4
D 31623095 1.14 Heart of the City
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Very High
Density P(CG, Res) P(Res) 25 65 29 74 45
E 31624047 1.08 Heart of the City
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Very High
Density P(CG, Res) P(Res) 25 65 27 70 43
F 31625042 0.88 Heart of the City
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Very High
Density P(CG, Res) P(Res) 25 65 22 57 35
G 31626090 2.2 Heart of the City
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Very High
Density P(CG, Res) P(Res) 25 65 55 143 88
H 32631019 3.79 Heart of the City
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Very High
Density P(CG, Res) P(Res) 0 65 0 246 246
I 32632051 0.68 Heart of the City
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Very High
Density P(CG, Res) P(CG,
Res) 25 65 17 44 27
J 36903002 1.05 Heart of the City
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Very High
Density P(CG, Res) P(CG,
Res) 25 65 26 68 42
K 36905044 1.92 Heart of the City
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Very High
Density P(CG, Res) P(CG,
Res) 25 65 48 125 77
L 36940038 0.93 Heart of the City
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Very High
Density P(CG, Res) P(CG, Res) 25 65 23 60 37
977
CC 05-14-2024
977 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
PLACEWORKS 5-15
TABLE 5-3 ALTERNATIVE B: INCREASED HOUSING SITES
Site
No.
Assessor’s
Parcel
Number
Size
(acres) Neighborhood
General Plan
Land Use Designation Zoning District
Maximum Density
(dwelling units/acre) a
Maximum Dwelling Units
Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Net New b M 37501014 0.51 Heart of the City
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Very High
Density P(CG, Res) P(CG,
Res) 25 65 13 33 20
N 37501021 1.31 Heart of the City
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Very High
Density P(CG, Res) P(CG,
Res) 25 65 33 85 52
O 37501022 1.03 Heart of the City
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Very High
Density P(CG, Res) P(CG,
Res) 25 65 26 67 41
P 37502021 0.84 Heart of the City
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Very High
Density P(CG, Res) P(CG,
Res) 25 65 21 55 34
Q 37506005 2.31 Heart of the City
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Very High
Density P(CG, Res) P(CG,
Res) 25 65 58 150 92
R 36905007 0.46 Heart of the City
- Central
Commercial/
Office/
Residential
Commercial
/Residential P(CG, Res) P(Res) 25 65 12 30 18
S 3263404,
32634066 5.1 Heart of the City Commercial Very High Density P(CG, Res) P(CG, Res) 0 65 0 332 332 Notes:
a. Dwelling unit density is expressed as the number of dwelling units permitted per gross acre. b. The net new is the proposed maximum density minus the existing maximum density.
Source: City of Cupertino, 2023.
978
CC 05-14-2024
978 of 1197
Creeks and Waterways
Parks and Open Space
0.25 0.5
Mies
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
Housing Element Opportunity Sites
- Residential
Additional Housing Sites
D Residential
Note: This map is intended to show general locations of identified housing opportunity sites by Assessor Parcel Numbers or APNs, and is not intended to be used to identify project specific development boundaries.
Project-specific development boundaries will be determined on a project-by-project basis as future development is proposed.
Source: ESRI, 2022; ABAG, 2022; City of Cupertino, 2023; PlaceWorks, 2023. Figure 5-1 Alternative B: Increased Housing Sites
979
CC 05-14-2024
979 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
PLACEWORKS 5-17
The westward views of the foothills and ridgelines of the Santa Cruz Mountains are considered scenic vistas and the Caltrans designated segment of Interstate 280 (I-280) from Santa Clara County line on the west to I-880 on the east is an eligible State Scenic Highway is a scenic corridor. Potential future development under either scenario would occur in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized. Therefore, implementation of either scenario would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista or damage existing scenic resources within a state scenic highway and impacts would be similar.
Applicable future projects under both scenarios would be subject to the Architectural and Site Review process, in accordance with CMC Chapter 19.168, Architectural and Site Review, or would be required to comply with Design Standards outlined in the General Plan, Heart of the City Specific Plan, or other appropriate Conceptual Plans, the Monta Vista Design Guidelines, or the South Vallco Specific Plan.
Additionally, both alternatives would benefit from the new and modified 2040 General Plan goals, policies, and strategies.
Alternative B would result in new lighting sources that could result in sources of glare. Potential future development under both scenarios would be required to comply with best management practices in CALGreen and CMC that ensure new land uses do not generate excessive light levels and reduce light and glare spillover from future development to surrounding land uses. Because Alternative B would increase housing opportunities in commercial corridors beyond what was evaluated in the proposed Modified Project, more new light and glare sources would be introduced, and impacts would be greater when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
Though development in the Study Area would be increased, development under Alternative B would follow the new or modified General Plan 2040 goals, policies, or strategies, and regulations that guide development in Cupertino, and would be located on infill sites. Thus, impacts related to aesthetics would be similar when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
AIR QUALITY
As described in Chapter 4.2, Air Quality, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts even with implementation of the Standard Environmental Protection Requirements in CMC Chapter 17.04. Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would have the potential to exceed BAAQMD significance thresholds for Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOx), coarse inhalable particulate matter (PM10), and fine inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5), as well as conflict with the BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan.
Alternative B would increase housing opportunities along commercial corridors, which would result in more development in the Study Area compared to the proposed Modified Project. Development under both scenarios would be subject to applicable laws and regulations, including those under Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC) Section 17.04.040, Standard Environmental Protection Technical Report Submittal Requirements, and Section 17.04.050, Standard Environmental Protection Permit Submittal Requirements.
Additionally, future development under both scenarios could result in construction activities near residential and other sensitive land uses, thus, temporarily elevating concentrations of toxic air contaminants in the vicinity of sensitive land uses. While the regulatory setting mitigating construction 980
CC 05-14-2024
980 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
5-18 APRIL 2024
impacts is the same under both scenarios, more development would occur under Alternative B; therefore, construction impacts would be greater when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
Both the proposed Modified Project and Alternative B would result in the introduction of a population growth which goes beyond the growth projections contained in Plan Bay Area 2040, which underpins the growth assumptions used for the emissions forecasts in the 2017 Clean Air Plan. Therefore, like the proposed Modified Project, Alternative B would also be considered inconsistent with the applicable AQMP and impacts with regards to attainment of air quality standards would be similar under both scenarios.
Like the proposed Modified Project, Alternative B is not the type of project that would result in significant impacts from odor and impacts would be similar under both scenarios.
Because emissions from the transportation sector produce the greatest emissions and as discussed in Section 5.5.2.14, Transportation, VMT would be less under Alternative B when compared to the proposed Modified Project, overall impacts under Alternative B would be less when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
As described in Chapter 4.4, Biological Resources, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would result in less-than-significant impacts to biological resources. Alternative B would increase development potential along commercial corridors. The additional potential future development would occur in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized in highly urbanized areas. Additionally, under both Alternative A and the proposed Modified Project, potential future development would be required to comply with the Standard Environmental Protection Requirements under CMC Section 17.04.050, Standard Environmental Protection Permit Submittal Requirements. Thus, impacts to biological resources from potential future development as allowed under Alternative B would be similar when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
CULTURAL AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
As described in Chapter 4.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would result in less-than-significant impacts to cultural and tribal cultural resources.
Under Alternative B, potential future development would occur at similar locations as under the proposed Modified Project with increased development potential along commercial corridors. As explained in Chapter 4.4, there are existing prehistoric, architectural, historical, or archaeological resources in the Study Area that could all be impacted by new demolition, inappropriate modification, or inappropriate new construction under the proposed Modified Project or Alternative B. Like the proposed Modified Project, Alternative B would be subject to the procedures of conduct following the discovery of human remains set forth in California Health and Safety Code, Public Resources Code, and the California Code of Regulations, as well as the policies and strategies in General Plan 2040. Additionally, future potential development under both the proposed Modified Project and Alternative A would be required to comply with CMC Section 17.04.050, Standard Environmental Protection Permit Submittal Requirements.
Development in both scenarios would occur on previously disturbed sites and/or near existing 981
CC 05-14-2024
981 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
PLACEWORKS 5-19
development where buried cultural and tribal cultural resources may be less common. Though more development would occur under the Alternative B scenario, the development would occur in similar locations as under the proposed Modified Project, and the potential to impact these resources would be similar when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
ENERGY
As described in Chapter 4.5, Energy, of this Draft EIR, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant impacts related to energy.
All development that occurs in the state is required to comply with best management practices regulated in the CALGreen and Building and Energy Efficiency Standards, which ensure new development would not result in the wasteful or inefficient use of energy. Additionally, it is assumed that neither the proposed Modified Project nor Alternative B would introduce a level of development and population growth that would be anticipated to necessitate the construction of new energy supply facilities or transmission infrastructure.
More development would occur under the Alternative B scenario, so energy consumption from construction would be greater when compared to the proposed Modified Project. However, this development would be on infill sites and near residential serving development, thus decreasing emissions and energy consumption from travel. Therefore, overall energy demand and consumption would be similar under Alternative B when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
As described in Chapter 4.6, Geology and Soils, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would result in less-than-significant impacts related to geology and soils.
Future development under both Alternative B and the proposed Modified Project would be subject to the same federal, state, and local regulations that address and minimize hazards associated with geology, soils, and seismicity. Both the Alternative B and proposed Modified Project encourage development in urbanized settings where there is less likelihood for impacts from geologic hazards to occur and include General Plan policies and strategies that minimize adverse effects to geologic processes, soil erosion, and loss of topsoil.
Although Alternative B would result in more overall development, it would be in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized, and/or near existing residential and residential-serving development making impacts to geology and soils less likely.
Additionally, compliance with existing regulations related to geologic and seismic safety would apply similarly to both future development under Alternative B and the proposed Modified Project. Thus, Alternative B would result in similar impacts when compared to the proposed Modified Project. 982
CC 05-14-2024
982 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
5-20 APRIL 2024
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
As described in Chapter 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts to GHG emissions and would not be consistent with the GHG emissions thresholds set by Executive Order B-55-18 and the California Air Resources Board Scoping Plan.
There would be more development under the Alternative B scenario, though the additional development potential would be limited to infill/intensification on sites within commercial corridors. This would reduce the need for residents to drive to residential serving businesses and would thus decrease GHG emissions.
Additionally, VMT reduction policies and strategies under the proposed Modified Project would also apply to Alternative B.
Though there would be more development potential under Alternative B, because emissions from the transportation sector produce the greatest emissions and as discussed in Section 5.5.2.14, Transportation, VMT would be less under Alternative B when compared to the proposed Modified Project, overall impacts under Alternative B would be less when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
As described in Chapter 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials. Cupertino is not within two miles of a public airport or within any protected airspace zones defined by the Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), and there are no private airstrips or heliports listed by FAA in Cupertino, thus there would be no impact under either scenario.
Though potential future development would be increased under the Alternative B scenario, all development that could occur from implementation of the proposed Modified Project or Alternative B would be required to comply with all federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to hazards and hazardous materials. Additionally, and General Plan policies and strategies and compliance with CMC Section 17.04.040(B), Hazardous Materials, would further reduce impacts related to hazardous materials.
Furthermore, implementation of either scenarios would require the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials, which would not increase due to additional residential development.
The proposed Modified Project and Alternative B would include the same General Plan 2040 policies to minimize potential adverse impacts on residential projects within an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Thus, impacts under the Alternative B scenario would be similar to the proposed Modified Project.
Thus, though there would be more development potential under Alternative B, the location of this development and the requirement to comply with applicable laws, policies, and design standards would result in a similar impact when compared to the proposed Modified Project. 983
CC 05-14-2024
983 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
PLACEWORKS 5-21
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
As described in Chapter 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant impacts related to hydrology and water quality. Compliance with existing State and local regulations and procedures would ensure that pre- and post-construction impacts to water quality would be less than significant. These regulations and procedures would be maintained under Alternative B.
Potential future development under both scenarios would occur within previously urbanized areas and would connect to existing drainage systems already in place. Alternative B involves more development potential, more ground disturbance and potential change in drainage patterns, and more water use from groundwater sources. As such, impacts to hydrology and water quality would be greater when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
LAND USE AND PLANNING
As described in Chapter 4.10, Land Use and Planning, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would result in less-than-significant impacts to land use and planning.
Both the proposed Modified Project and Alternative B would aim to improve connectivity and would not create physical barriers within existing communities. They would also both support the integration of infill development, while Alternative B further promotes this by providing additional housing opportunities along commercial corridors. Therefore, implementation of either development scenario would not conflict with any applicable land use plan adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect and impacts would be similar when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
NOISE
As described in Chapter 4.11, Noise, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would result in lessthan-significant impacts to noise. The Study Area is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan, and therefore would have no impact related to airport or aircraft noise.
Under Alternative B, development under the proposed Modified Project would be implemented, with additional residential sites along commercial corridors. This would result in additional noise from construction, traffic, and other sources that would increase ambient noise levels. However, both the proposed Modified Project and Alternative B would be required to comply with CMC Section 10.48, Community Noise Control, Section 17.04.040(D)(1), Vibration Technical Report Requirements, and Section
17.04.050(G)(1), Noise and Vibration Permit Requirements, as well as federal, State, and local regulations related to temporary and operational noise.
While there is more development potential under Alterative B and overall temporary noise from more construction would be greater than under the proposed Modified Project, because as discussed in Section
5.5.2.14, Transportation, VMT would be less under Alternative B when compared to the proposed Modified Project, overall long-term operational noise impacts under Alternative B would be less when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
984
CC 05-14-2024
984 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
5-22 APRIL 2024
POPULATION AND HOUSING
As described in Chapter 4.12, Population and Housing, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant impacts related to population and housing.
Alternative B would include additional housing opportunity sites beyond what is included in the proposed Modified Project required to meet the 2023-2031 RHNA. Additionally, Alternative B would include the updated policy framework of the proposed Modified Project that ensures adequate planning occurs to accommodate the project growth of the city. Therefore, impacts under Alternative B would be similar when compared to those under the proposed Modified Project.
PUBLIC SERVICES
As described in Chapter 4.13, Public Services, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant impacts related to fire protection services, police services, parks, schools, and libraries.
Alternative B would result in more housing and thus more residents in the Study Area. Therefore, the Alternative B scenario would result in greater demand for the public services provided in the Study Area.
Potential future development under Alternative B would also be required to comply with all existing City regulations adopted to ensure that development pays its fair share of the cost of delivering services, providing park space and libraries, while payment of property taxes would ensure that future development pays its fair share towards schools. Overall, impacts under Alternative B would be greater than those of the proposed Modified Project.
TRANSPORTATION
As described in Chapter 4.14, Transportation, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in significant impacts related to conflicting with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, increasing hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses, or inadequate emergency access. However, the proposed Modified Project would result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to an increase in VMT beyond the City’s adopted threshold.
Alternative B would result in more infill housing in PDAs and TPAs and thus an increase in residents in the Study Area. However, these additional residents would reside along TPAs and PDAs and provide housing close to walkable or transit-served commercial and office spaces. Like the proposed Modified Project, Alternative B would not result in significant impacts related to conflicting with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, increasing hazards due to geometric design features or incompatible uses, or inadequate emergency access. Additionally, future potential development under both the proposed Modified Project and Alternative B would be required to comply with CMC Section 17,04.040(C), Vehicle Miles Traveled Technical Report Requirements, and CMC Section 17.08, Evaluation of Transportation Impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act, as well as federal, State, regional, and local regulations related to transportation.
985
CC 05-14-2024
985 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
PLACEWORKS 5-23
However, Alternative B would result in more residents concentrated along TPA and PDA corridors, and therefore less VMT compared to the proposed Modified Project. Therefore, overall impacts under Alternative B would be less when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
As described in Chapter 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant impacts related to water, wastewater, , stormwater, or energy infrastructure and services.
Demand and consumption trends generally demonstrate that advances in recycling and solid waste reduction requirements, water-efficient regulations in building and landscaping, and stricter stormwater retention requirements, would reduce impacts under both the proposed Modified Project and Alternative B. Future potential development under both the proposed Modified Project and Alternative B would be required to comply with federal, State, regional, and local regulations for managing stormwater during construction and operation of projects, including CMC Section 17.04.050(F), Control Stormwater Runoff Contamination. However, it is assumed that because Alternative B would result in more overall development than the proposed Modified Project, there would be greater overall water demand, wastewater and solid waste generation, and energy use. Thus, impacts under Alternative B would be greater than those of the proposed Modified Project.
WILDFIRE
As described in Chapter 4.16, Wildfire, of this Draft EA, the proposed Modified Project would not result in any significant wildfire impacts. Due to compliance with applicable local, regional, and State regulations, development under both scenarios would not impair the implementation of an emergency response or emergency evacuation plan or be within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone or a Wildland Urban Interface Fire Area, nor would either scenario expose people or structures to significant wildfire risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides. Neither scenario would result in the installation or maintenance of any infrastructure that could exacerbate fire risk or result in impacts to the environment. Therefore, potential future development under the Alternative B scenario would have similar wildfire impacts when compared to the proposed Modified Project.
5.5.3 RELATIONSHIP OF THE ALTERNATIVE TO THE OBJECTIVES As listed in Section 5.2, Project Objectives, the primary purposes of the proposed Modified Project are to plan for the maintenance, preservation, improvement, and development of housing in the city between 2023 and 2031. This includes rezoning sites to be consistent with the land use designations, affirmatively furthering fair housing, incentivizing development of housing to meet all income levels, and promoting a healthy and sustainable Cupertino that minimizes reliance on natural resources and vehicle use. Because Alternative B would increase opportunities for residential development within PDA and TPA areas of the city, this alternative would both support housing for all income, reduce reliance on vehicle use, and increase housing on previously disturbed sites. Therefore, Alternative B would meet all the project objectives.
986
CC 05-14-2024
986 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED MODIFIED PROJECT
5-24 APRIL 2024
5.6 ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
In addition to the discussion and comparison of impacts of the proposed Modified Project and the alternatives, Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an “environmentally superior” alternative be selected and the reasons for such a selection be disclosed. In general, the environmentally superior alternative is the alternative to the proposed Modified Project that would be expected to generate the least number of significant impacts. Identification of the environmentally superior alternative is an informational procedure and the alternative to the proposed Modified Project selected may not be the alternative to the proposed Modified Project that best meets the goals or needs of Cupertino. Because CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(c) requires an evaluation of a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed Modified Project, the proposed Modified Project under consideration cannot be identified as the environmentally superior alternative. Additionally, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2), if the environmentally superior alternative is the “No Project” alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.
As shown in Table 5-2, Alternative B would, in comparison to the proposed project, result in reduced environmental impacts related to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and transportation.
Therefore, as shown in Table 5-2, Alternative B would be the environmentally superior alternative. 987
CC 05-14-2024
987 of 1197
PLACEWORKS 6-1
CEQA-Mandated Sections
This chapter provides an overview of the impacts of the proposed Modified Project based on the analyses presented in Chapters 4.1 through 4.16 of this EA. The topics covered in this chapter include impacts found not to be significant, impacts found to be significant and unavoidable, growth-inducing impacts, and significant irreversible changes to the environment. A detailed analysis of the effects that the proposed Modified Project would have on the environment, and proposed mitigation measures to minimize significant impacts, are provided in Chapters 4.1 through 4.16 of this EA.
6.1 IMPACTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT
CEQA Guidelines Section 15128, Effects Not Found to Be Significant, allows environmental issues for which there is no likelihood of significant impact to be “scoped out” and not analyzed further in the environmental analysis. This section explains the reasoning for the determination that the proposed Modified Project would have no effect within an entire environmental topic or under specific criteria within an environmental topic. As shown below, there would be no impacts to agriculture, forestry, or mineral resources as a whole; therefore, these topics are not evaluated in Chapter 4, Environmental Analysis, of this EA. Furthermore, there would be no impacts to some of the criteria for biological resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, and noise. These specific criteria are identified in the corresponding subsection of this chapter and are not required to be evaluated in Chapter 4.
6.1.1 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
The proposed Modified Project is within the city of Cupertino, which is an urbanized area with no agricultural resources. Maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency categorize land within the Study Area as Urban and Built-Up Land.1 There are no agricultural lands classified as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) within the Study Area. Potential future development permitted as a result of the proposed Modified Project would not occur within lands zoned for agricultural use in the Study Area. Therefore, there would not be a conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract.
According to 2006 mapping data from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, the City does not contain any woodland or forestland cover;2 hence, the Study Area does not contain land zoned 1 California Resources Agency, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Santa Clara County Important Farmland 2020, accessed on January 8, 2024.
2 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Fire and Resource Assessment Program, Land Cover Map, accessed on January 8, 2024.
988
CC 05-14-2024
988 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CEQA-MANDATED SECTIONS
6-2 APRIL 2024
for Timberland Production, nor does the Cupertino Zoning Map identify any areas zoned for Timberland Production.3 Consequently, there would be no impacts to agriculture and forestry resources.
6.1.2 MINERAL RESOURCES
Although Cupertino does have mineral resource zones (MRZ) classified as MRZ-2, which are areas where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, and MRZ-3, which are areas containing mineral deposits for which the significance cannot be evaluated from available data, the Study Area is largely urbanized. With the exception of the four areas described below, there are no areas in the Study Area identified for protection or conservation with regard to mineral resources, given those areas are already developed and/or not considered suitable for conservation.4
There are four mineral resource areas in the general area of Cupertino, including two in unincorporated lands of Santa Clara County but within Cupertino’s boundary agreement areas, and two are within the city limit. The Hansen Permanente and Stevens Creek sites have been designated by the State as having mineral deposits of regional or state significance. However, these two sites are under the jurisdiction of Santa Clara County, and the proposed Modified Project does not propose future potential development on these sites.
The two sites in the Study Area that are classified as mineral resource areas for which the State requires policies supporting preservation and extraction are not within the boundaries of the proposed Modified Project; therefore, the proposed Modified Project would have no impact on these areas. Regardless, most of the areas have been developed with residential and other urbanized uses. Consequently, because the mineral resource areas within the Study Area have been developed and are not considered suitable for conservation, there would be no impact to mineral resources.
6.1.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Impacts to biological resources are evaluated in Chapter 4.3, Biological Resources. The following standards of significance were determined to have no impact in Chapter 4.3:
Conflict with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Potential future development under the proposed Modified Project, like the Approved Project, would occur outside the boundaries of the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan and would not be within any other habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Additionally, potential future 3 City of Cupertino, 2005 General Plan, Zoning Map, http://www.cupertino.org/index.aspx?page=291, accessed on January 8, 2024.
4 City of Cupertino, General Plan 2040, Chapter 5, Environmental Resources and Sustainability Element, pages ES-9-ES-10. 989
CC 05-14-2024
989 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CEQA-MANDATED SECTIONS
PLACEWORKS 6-3
development under the proposed Modified Project would also occur in urbanized areas without sensitive natural communities. Thus, no impact would occur under either criterion.
6.1.4 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Impacts related to geology and soils are evaluated in Chapter 4.6, Geology and Soils. The following standard of significance was determined to have no impact in Chapter 4.6:
Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Potential future development under the proposed Modified Project, like the Approved Project, would not include the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, no impact would occur regarding soil capability to adequately support the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Thus, no impact would occur under this criterion.
6.1.5 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials are evaluated in Chapter 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials. The following standard of significance was determined to have no impact in Chapter 4.8:
For a project within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, result in a safety hazard for people living or working in the project area?
The Study Area is not within two miles of a public airport or within any protected airspace zones defined by the Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission, and there are no private airstrips or heliports listed by FAA in Cupertino. Thus, no impact would occur under this criterion.
6.1.6 NOISE
Noise-related impacts are evaluated in Chapter 4.11, Noise. The following standard of significance was determined to have no impact in Chapter 4.11:
For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The Study Area is not within two miles of a public airport or within any protected airspace zones defined by the Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission, and there are no private airstrips or heliports listed by FAA in Cupertino. Thus, no impact would occur under this criterion. 990
CC 05-14-2024
990 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CEQA-MANDATED SECTIONS
6-4 APRIL 2024
6.1 SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS
Section 15126.2(b) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that “direct and indirect significant effects of the project on the environment shall be clearly identified and described, giving due consideration to both the short- and long-term effects.” Chapter 2, Executive Summary, of this EA, contains Table 2-1, Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures, which summarizes the significant impacts, mitigation measures, and levels of significance with and without mitigation. The identification of these program-level impacts do not preclude the finding of less-than-significant impacts for subsequent projects analyzed at the project level that do not exceed the thresholds of significance. As detailed in Chapter 4.3, Air Quality, Chapter 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Chapter 4.14, Transportation, of this Draft EA, the following impacts would remain significant and unavoidable after feasible mitigation measures are applied:
Impact AIR-1: Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would conflict with the growth assumptions under Plan Bay Area 2040 that are applied to the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD) 2017 Clean Air Plan, the proposed Modified Project would therefore conflict with the air quality emissions forecast in the BAAQMD 2017 Clean Air Plan. Impact AIR-2: Operation of development projects that could occur from implementation of the proposed Modified Project would generate emissions that would exceed Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s regional significance thresholds for Reactive Organic Gases (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), coarse inhalable particulate matter (PM10), and fine inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5). Impact AIR-5: The emissions that could occur over the buildout horizon of the proposed Modified Project could generate a substantial increase in emissions that exceeds the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s significance thresholds and cumulatively contribute to the nonattainment designations and health risk in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. Impact GHG-1: Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would exceed the net zero greenhouse gas emission threshold under Executive Order B-55-18. Impact GHG-2: The proposed Modified Project would not meet California Green Building Standards Code nonresidential voluntary Tier 2 electric vehicle parking standards and would exceed the City of Cupertino’s vehicle miles traveled reduction threshold, and therefore be inconsistent with the California Air Resources Board Scoping Plan.
Impact GHG-3: The proposed Modified Project would result in vehicle miles traveled that would exceed the City of Cupertino’s reduction target, and therefore conflict with the California Air Resources Board Scoping Plan and Executive Order B-55-18. Impact TRANS-2: Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would exceed the adopted Cupertino vehicle miles traveled (VMT) threshold per service population of 31.30 VMT by 3.5 VMT per service population, due to forecasted growth through 2040. Impact TRANS-5: Implementation of the proposed Modified Project would cumulatively contribute to regional vehicle miles traveled.
991
CC 05-14-2024
991 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CEQA-MANDATED SECTIONS
PLACEWORKS 6-5
6.2 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE CHANGES DUE TO THE
PROPOSED PROJECT
Section 15126.2(c) of the CEQA Guidelines requires an EIR to describe the extent to which the proposed project would commit nonrenewable resources to uses that future generations would probably be unable to reverse. The three CEQA-required categories of irreversible changes are described herein.
6.2.1 CHANGES IN LAND USE THAT COMMIT FUTURE
GENERATIONS
As described in detail in Chapter 3, Project Description, of this EA, the proposed Modified Project maintains the land use pattern of General Plan 2040. Potential future development under the proposed Modified Project would occur in existing urban areas and would be concentrated on a limited number of parcels and in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized, and/or near existing residential and residential-serving development. However, some potential future development may occur on vacant non-urban sites that are already designated for development. Once future development under the proposed Modified Project occurs, it would not be feasible to return the developed land to its existing (pre-project) condition. Therefore, there is potential that some of the development allowed under the proposed Modified Project would lead to irreversible changes in land use.
6.2.2 IRREVERSIBLE DAMAGE FROM ENVIRONMENTAL
ACCIDENTS
Irreversible changes to the physical environment could occur from accidental release of hazardous materials associated with development activities; however, compliance with the applicable regulations and General Plan 2040 goals, policies, and programs, as described in Chapter 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, would reduce this potential impact to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, irreversible damage is not expected to result from the adoption and implementation of the proposed Modified Project.
6.2.3 LARGE COMMITMENT OF NONRENEWABLE RESOURCES
Implementation of development under the proposed Modified Project would result in the commitment of limited, renewable resources, such as lumber and water. In addition, potential future development under the proposed Modified Project would irretrievably commit nonrenewable resources for the construction of buildings, infrastructure, and roadway improvements. These nonrenewable resources include mined minerals, such as sand, gravel, steel, lead, copper, and other metals. Future buildout under the proposed Modified Project also represents a long-term commitment to the consumption of fossil fuels and gasoline.
Increased energy demands would be used for construction, lighting, heating, and cooling of residences, and transportation of people within, to, and from the Study Area. However, as shown in Chapter 4.5, Energy, and in Section 4.15.1, Water, and Section 4.15.4, Solid Waste, of Chapter 4.15, Utilities and Service Systems, of this EA, several regulatory measures and General Plan 2040 goals, policies, and strategies encourage energy and water conservation, alternative energy use, waste reduction, alternatives to 992
CC 05-14-2024
992 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CEQA-MANDATED SECTIONS
6-6 APRIL 2024
automotive transportation, and green building. Potential future development under the proposed Modified Project would be required to comply with all applicable building and design requirements, including those in Title 24, California Buildings Standards Code, relating to energy conservation. In compliance with CALGreen, the State’s Green Building Standards Code, future potential development under the proposed Modified Project would be required to reduce water consumption by 20 percent, divert 50 percent of construction waste from landfills, and install low pollutant-emitting materials.
Additionally, future potential development under the proposed Modified Project would be fully electric and include EV charging infrastructure. Therefore, while the construction and operation of potential future development under the proposed Modified Project would involve the use of nonrenewable resources, compliance with applicable standards and regulations and implementation of General Plan 2040 goals, policies, and strategies would reduce the use of nonrenewable resources to the maximum extent practicable; therefore, the proposed Modified Project would not represent a large commitment of nonrenewable resources in comparison to a business-as-usual situation.
6.3 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED
PROJECT
Section 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR describes the ways in which a proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. Typical growth-inducing factors might be the extension of urban services or transportation infrastructure to a previously unserved or under-served area, or the removal of major barriers to development.
This section evaluates the proposed Modified Project’s potential to create such growth inducements. As CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) requires, “[it] must not be assumed that growth in an area is necessarily beneficial, detrimental, or of little significance to the environment.” In other words, negative impacts associated with growth inducement occur only where the projected growth would cause significant adverse environmental impacts.
Growth-inducing impacts fall into two general categories: direct or indirect. Direct growth-inducing impacts are generally associated with providing urban services to an undeveloped area. Indirect, or secondary growth-inducing impacts consist of growth induced in the region by additional demands for housing, goods, and services associated with the population increase caused by, or attracted to, a new project.
As described in detail in Chapter 4.12, Population and Housing, of this EA, the General Plan is the policy document that plans ahead to accommodate the amount of reasonably foreseeable growth given past growth trends and the ability of existing services and infrastructure to support future growth. Therefore, implementation of the proposed Modified Project would not directly induce growth, but rather is a response to growth that is likely to occur within with Study Area. Because the General Plan 2040 includes recommendations for future development and infrastructure, it has the potential to indirectly induce growth. However, the General Plan itself is the City’s effort to adequately plan for this growth. 993
CC 05-14-2024
993 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CEQA-MANDATED SECTIONS
PLACEWORKS 6-7
Furthermore, this additional growth would likely occur incrementally over a period of approximately 8 to 15 years, and a policy framework is in place to ensure adequate planning occurs to accommodate it regardless of the development timeline. The proposed Modified Project results in concentrated and infill development and implements energy and water conservation requirements related to existing and new development, thereby minimizing consumption of non-renewable resources to the extent practicable.
6.3.1 DIRECT IMPACTS
The proposed Modified Project is a plan-level document and does not propose any specific development; however, implementation of the proposed Modified Project would induce growth by increasing the development potential in the Study Area, as shown in Table 3-8, Proposed 2040 Buildout Projections, in Chapter 3, Project Description. As shown in Table 3-8, the 2040 forecast of the proposed Modified Project is approximately 81,037 total population and 29,137 housing units. State law requires the City to promote the production of housing to meet its fair share of the regional housing needs distribution made by ABAG.
In addition, implementation of the proposed Modified Project would result in regional benefits by promoting growth that encourages less automobile dependence, which could have associated air quality and GHG benefits. Encouraging infill and concentrated growth would help to reduce development pressures on lands outside the Study Area.
6.3.2 INDIRECT IMPACTS
The proposed Modified Project could be considered growth inducing because it includes policies and strategies that encourage new growth in the Study Area. Potential future development would be concentrated on a limited number of parcels and in the form of infill/intensification on sites either already developed and/or underutilized, and/or near existing residential and residential-serving development.
However, future potential development and growth would be required to comply with the City’s General Plan 2040, zoning regulations, and standards for public services and utilities; secondary effects associated with this growth do not represent a new significant environmental impact that has not already been addressed in the individual resource chapters of this EA. Additionally, population growth would likely occur incrementally over a period of approximately 8 to 15 years and would be consistent with the regional planning objectives established for the Santa Clara County region. 994
CC 05-14-2024
994 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
CEQA-MANDATED SECTIONS
6-8 APRIL 2024
This page has been intentionally left blank.
995
CC 05-14-2024
995 of 1197
PLACEWORKS 7-1
Organizations and Persons Consulted
This Draft EA was prepared by the contributors listed and includes content and information provided by the lead agency, other agencies, consultants, and other contributors.
7.1 LEAD AGENCY
City of Cupertino
Community Development Department
Public Works Department
City Attorney Department
7.2 OTHER AGENCIES AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED
Native American Heritage Commission
Native American Tribes
Amah Mutsun Tribal Band
Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista
Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan
Muwekma Ohlone Indian Tribe of the SF Bay Area
North Valley Yokuts Tribe
Tamien Nation
Ohlone Indian Tribe
Wuksachi Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band
7.3 CONSULTANTS
PlaceWorks: Environmental Prime Consultant
ECORP: Noise
Fehr & Peers: Transportation
996
CC 05-14-2024
996 of 1197
GENERAL PLAN 2040 AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CUPERTINO
ORGANIZATIONS & PERSONS CONSULTED
7-2 APRIL 2024
This page has been intentionally left blank.
997
CC 05-14-2024
997 of 1197
998
CC 05-14-2024
998 of 1197
2040 Bancroft Way, Suite 400
Berkeley, California 94704
t 510.848.3815
www.PlaceWorks.com
ORANGE COUNTY • BAY AREA • SACRAMENTO • CENTRAL COAST • LOS ANGELES • INLAND EMPIRE 999
CC 05-14-2024
999 of 1197
1000
CC 05-14-2024
1000 of 1197
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
April 10, 2024
Benjamin Fu, Director
Department of Community Development
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Dear Benjamin Fu:
RE: City of Cupertino’s 6th Cycle (2023-2031) Revised Draft Housing Element Thank you for submitting the City of Cupertino’s (City) revised draft housing element update received for review on February 27,2024 along with revisions received on March 28, 2024. Pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (b), the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) is reporting the results of its review. Our review was facilitated by conversations in February 2024 and March 2024 with Luke Connolly, Piu Gosh, and the City’s consultant. In addition, HCD considered comments from Lisa Warren, and Building industry Association pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (c).
HCD is pleased to find the revised draft housing element meets the statutory requirements of State Housing Element Law (Gov. Code, § 65580 et seq.). However, the housing element cannot be found in substantial compliance until the City has completed necessary rezones to address the shortfall of sites to accommodate the regional housing needs allocation (RHNA) pursuant to Assembly Bill 1398 (Chapter 358, Statutes of 2021) as described below. The housing element will comply with State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Gov. Code) when it is adopted, submitted to and approved by HCD, in accordance with Government Code section 65585.
Pursuant to Assembly Bill 1398 (Chapter 358, Statutes of 2021), a jurisdiction that failed to adopt a compliant housing element within one year from the statutory deadline cannot be found in compliance until rezones to accommodate a shortfall of sites pursuant to Government Code section 65583, subdivision (c), paragraph (1), subparagraph (A) and Government Code section 65583.2, subdivision (c) are completed. As this year has passed and Program 1.3.2 (Rezoning to Achieve RHNA) has not been completed, the housing element is out of compliance and will remain out of compliance until the rezoning have been completed.
1001
CC 05-14-2024
1001 of 1197
Benjamin Fu, Director
For your information, if the housing element relies upon nonvacant sites to accommodate more than 50 percent of the RHNA for lower-income households, the housing element must demonstrate that the existing use is not an impediment to additional residential development in the planning period (Gov. Code, § 65583.2, subd. (g)(2).). This can be demonstrated by providing substantial evidence that the existing use is likely to be discontinued during the planning period (Gov. Code, § 65583.2, subd. (g)(2).). Absent findings (e.g., adoption resolution) based on substantial evidence, the existing uses will be presumed to impede additional residential development and will not be utilized toward demonstrating adequate sites to accommodate the regional housing need allocation (RHNA). The City must make these findings as part of its adoption resolution. Please see HCD’s Guidance memo (p. 27) for additional information: https://www.hcd.ca.gov/community-development/housingelement/housing-element-memos/docs/sites_inventory_memo_final06102020.pdf.
Public participation in the development, adoption and implementation of the housing element is essential to effective housing planning. Throughout the housing element process, the City must continue to engage the community, including organizations that represent lower-income and special needs households, by making information regularly available while considering and incorporating comments where appropriate. Please be aware, any revisions to the element must be posted on the local government’s website and to email a link to all individuals and organizations that have previously requested notices relating to the local government’s housing element at least seven days before submitting to HCD.
As a reminder, pursuant to Government Code section 65583.3, the City must submit an electronic sites inventory with its adopted housing element. The City must utilize standards, forms, and definitions adopted by HCD. Please see HCD’s housing element webpage at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/planning-and-community-development/housingelements for a copy of the form and instructions. The City can reach out to HCD at [email protected] for technical assistance.
Several federal, state, and regional funding programs consider housing element compliance as an eligibility or ranking criteria. For example, the CalTrans Senate Bill (SB) 1 Sustainable Communities grant, the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities programs, and HCD’s Permanent Local Housing Allocation consider housing element compliance and/or annual reporting requirements pursuant to Government Code section 65400. With a compliant housing element, the City meets housing element requirements for these and other funding sources.
For your information, some general plan element updates are triggered by housing element adoption. HCD reminds the City to consider timing provisions and welcomes the opportunity to provide assistance. For information, please see the Technical Advisories issued by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research at:
https://www.opr.ca.gov/planning/general-plan/guidelines.html. 1002
CC 05-14-2024
1002 of 1197
Benjamin Fu, Director
We are committed to assisting the City in addressing all statutory requirements of State Housing Element Law. If you have any questions or need additional technical assistance, please contact Jose Armando Jauregui, of our staff, at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Melinda Coy
Proactive Housing Accountability Chief
1003
CC 05-14-2024
1003 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
24-13163 Agenda Date: 5/14/2024
Agenda #: 2.
Subject: Fiscal Year 2024-25 Fee Schedule (continued from May 7, 2024)
1. Adopt Resolution No. 24‐040 approving FY 2024‐25 Fee Schedules A, B, C, and D. If adopted, new fees will be effective by July 14, 2024.
2. Adopt Resolution No. 24‐041 adopting User Fee Cost Recovery Policy CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/8/2024
powered by Legistar™1004
CC 05-14-2024
1004 of 1197
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting: May 14, 2024
Subject
Fiscal Year (FY) 2024‐25 Fee Schedule Update
Recommended Action
1. Adopt Resolution No. 24‐XXX approving FY 2024‐25 Fee Schedules A, B, C, and D. If adopted, new fees will be effective by July 14, 2024.
2. Adopt Resolution No. 24‐XXX adopting User Fee Cost Recovery Policy Reasons for Recommendation
The objective of a Comprehensive Fee Study is to re-evaluate time and cost assumptions and determine the full cost (direct and indirect) of providing City services based on the current organizational structure and processes. A User Fee Cost Recovery policy can support a fee study and aid in establishing clear guidance for determining cost recovery.
A comprehensive Fee Study is typically completed in conjunction with a Cost Allocation Plan (CAP) approximately every seven years. The City last completed a comprehensive fee study with a CAP in 2016. A new study was undertaken in 2023, and the results were presented at the February 6, 2024, City Council meeting. At that meeting, the City Council directed staff to complete the Fee Schedule update and to prepare a draft User Fee Cost Recovery policy for review.
Additionally, Council accepted the Cost Allocation Plan and Fee Study, and staff sought specific direction regarding the level of cost recovery for the proposed Fiscal Year 2024-25 fees, inclusion of new fees, and language in the Cost Recovery Policy. Council direction included staff proposing full cost recovery for most fees except for appeal fees and those fees with the intention to incentivize compliance. Additionally, Council agreed to the inclusion of a Credit Card Transaction Fee to offset the merchant costs and a Technology Fee to recover costs associated with the permit tracking system. A phased-in approach towards achieving full cost recovery for fees with more significant proportionate increases was also supported. Lastly, Council directed staff to incorporate key elements in the proposed User Fee Cost Recovery Policy, as outlined later in this staff report. 1005
CC 05-14-2024
1005 of 1197
The proposed full cost recovery rates outlined in the recent Fee Study are derived from the following factors: revenue activity in FY 2022-23, current fiscal year cost of service, staff time, and budget. In addition to utilizing the full cost recovery rate, staffrecommends applying index-based adjustments, such as the Consumer Price Index (CPI), the Bay Area Construction Cost Index (CCI), or budgeted labor costs, to most FY 2023-24, excluding state regulated fees.
New Fees and Substantial Changes
Per Council’s direction to prepare full cost recovery fees, staff also presented a list of new fees to be adopted. A summary of these new fees within each schedule is discussed below.
Schedule A – General: This schedule includes fees not specific to a department or division that would require a dedicated schedule, such as code enforcement permits, City Clerk services, database requests, business license applications and related fees, and other fees for service.
While no new fees were proposed, the fee schedule includes several modifications, such as consolidating multiple fees, eliminating the 'Microfilm/Microfiche Printout' fee (no longer offered), and modifying enforcement fees to align with services provided.
A CPI adjustment is also proposed for all relevant fees using the full cost recovery rate included in the fee study. The adjustments to these fees are primarily influenced by changes in the cost of materials or external factors beyond the City's control.
Schedule B – Engineering: Utilized by the Development Services Division within the Public Works Department, this schedule covers fees necessary for the division to review plans and applications for private developments (onsite grading and drainage operations), issuance of encroachment permits, inspections of work performed within the Public Right of Way, along with other permits, and services. Engineering fees are typically adjusted annually by CCI and Budgeted Labor Costs.
The following proposed new fees aim to recover costs for services already provided by the Public Works Department. Over recent years, these service requests have required increased staff time to complete, in which the current fee schedule did not have an appropriate fee item that correlated to these service requests. Crane Lift Encroachment Permits have seen a surge in demand due to the rise in prefabricated ADUs, requiring additional plan review and coordination with crane lift companies.
The Planning Application Review fee aims to recover costs for Public Works staff time and coordination required for medium to large development projects. This is in addition to application fees that Community Development Department currently charges.
1006
CC 05-14-2024
1006 of 1197
Similarly, the Environmental Programs Plan Review fees aim to recover costs for plan reviews of planning applications or building permits, a service historically provided without charge.
VMT Monitoring Fees address the new concept of VMT and the City's efforts to ensure compliance with SB 743 and related Municipal Code requirements. These fees cover staff time for evaluating impacts, determining mitigations, and ensuring ongoing compliance throughout a project's lifespan.
In addition to new fees, the schedule incorporates several adjustments, including the implementation of a three-year phase-in period for fees related to a Certificate of Compliance. Furthermore, the schedule continues the practice of not charging for Block Party services but will now begin recovering costs associated with the Bi-Annual Parking Permit. Additionally, Transportation Impact Fees and Park Land Dedication In‐Lieu Fees will remain unchanged.
- Park Land Dedication In‐Lieu Fees and Transportation Impact Fees o Park Land Dedication In‐Lieu Fees are calculated per Municipal Code section 13.08. On an annual basis, the Public Works Department updates the fair market value of land within the City based on the appraised values of land sales.
o The Public Works Department continues to evaluate Parkland Dedication and Transportation Impact fees for FY 2024‐25. Per Cupertino Municipal Code section 13.08.060, the Director of Public Works had a qualified appraiser evaluate the fair market value of land within the City. The evaluation prepared in March 2024 showed that value of land remained substantially unchanged since the report prepared in 2023, and therefore the Director recommends the Parkland Dedication fee remain the same.
Public Works staff recommends that increases to Transportation Impact fees be deferred to allow for further review of potential fee increases.
Schedule C – Planning: This schedule is utilized by the Planning Division, which administers all required review and evaluation processes for proposed land use projects and maintains the goals and objectives of the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
Planning fees are typically adjusted annually by CPI and Budgeted Labor Costs.
The following new fees are proposed to address the increased demand for certain specific services and to streamline existing processes. Over recent years, there has been a surge in requests for these services, leading to significant staff time allocation and a backlog in other permit applications. The first four fees—Project Review Meeting, Preliminary Application Review, Planning Inspections, and Special Events (Large and Small)—aim to recover costs for complementary services provided by the City that are subsidized by the General Fund. The latter two fees—Sign Permit and Mercury News Ad—clarify existing procedures.
1007
CC 05-14-2024
1007 of 1197
Project Review Meeting offers preliminary feedback on proposed development but requires substantial staff time and coordination. This service is often requested by the applicant.
Preliminary Application Reviews assess project feasibility to assist the applicant in a more streamlined application review process.
Planning Inspections ensure code compliance and will capture staff costs from excessive rounds of review.
Special Events permits, which assess potential impacts on parking, traffic, and safety, have traditionally been provided at no charge but require significant staff time and coordination.
Sign Permit fees are proposed to establish a fee category for certain signs requiring public meeting review. A new permit type was necessary to align with the existing Municipal Code. This fee, aligning with existing sign exception fees, which have similar processing requirements, is proposed to capture the time associated with processing such permits.
Mercury News Ad fee aims to recover the expenses associated with notices published in the Mercury News instead of the Cupertino Courier to meet public notice deadlines before desired hearing dates. This fee ensures transparency and accountability in the noticing process.
Following Council direction, the schedule purposefully includes decreased cost recovery levels for Reasonable Accommodation by 50% and most tree-related fees by 67%, albeit the fees marginally increased compared to current rates.
Schedule D – Building: Utilized by the Building Division of the Community Development Department, this schedule includes fees for providing the following services: plan review and permit issuance of all proposed construction; code, ordinance, requirements, and regulation explanations; building inspection services; and other building and development-related services. Building fees are typically adjusted annually by Budgeted Labor Costs.
The proposed schedule includes fees for services provided but not captured in the current fee schedule, such as inspection and plan review fees for larger Additions ranging from 500 to 999 square feet, Solar Thermal Systems to heat liquids for water heaters and boilers, and Accessory Buildings like sheds. The schedule also consolidated fees in the Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Fee Table 3 to become more general and inclusive. Additionally, the schedule includes the removal of fees for services no longer offered, such as review of third parties and life safety reports.
The most significant change proposed in this schedule involves the consolidation of the plan review and inspection fees, located in Tables 1 and 2 of Schedule D, where several occupancy subclasses have been averaged into one for enhanced usability by staff and clarity for citizens.
1008
CC 05-14-2024
1008 of 1197
Index-Based Adjustments
Depending on the user fee, the CPI, CCI, or change in budget cost adjustment is applied based on the user fee’s underlying cost driver. For FY 2024‐25, the CPI increase is 2.37% per Bureau of Labor Statistics, the CCI increase is 0.70% per Engineering News Record, and the labor cost increase is 1.02%, as shown in the table below.
February
2023
February
2024
Index
Increase
Percent
Increase
Consumer Price Index for
All Urban Consumers
(CPI‐U)
337.17 345.151 7.978 2.37%
Construction Cost Index
(CCI) 15,419.90 15,527.50 107.6 0.70%
Budgeted Labor Costs $ 41,187,5051 $ 41,606,0272 $418,522 1.02% 1 Base Salary and Benefits (FY 2023‐24 Adopted Budget)
2 Base Salary and Benefits (FY 2024‐25 Estimated Budget) The net 1% increase in estimated Budget Labor Costs is primarily comprised of approximately a 1% increase to account for employees progressing to higher salary steps, increases in negotiated benefits, and a decrease in staffing levels through attrition.
Attrition is the elimination of positions after they become vacant.
The following table summarizes the current year’s application of indexes to Schedules AD, along with the rate increases for the previous four years.
Fiscal Year Schedule A –
General Fees
Schedule B –
Engineering
Fees
Schedule C –
Planning Fees
Schedule D –
Building Fees
2024-25
(Proposed)
FY 2023-24 costrecovery plus
2.4% CPI
FY 2023-24 costrecovery plus
0.7% CCI,
1.0% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
FY 2023-24 cost -
recovery plus
2.4% CPI
1.0% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
FY 2023-24 cost -
recovery plus
1.0% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
2023-24 5.3% CPI
7.1% CCI,
9.0% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
5.3% CPI
9.0% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
9.0% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
2022-23 5.2% CPI
9.8% CCI,
1.0% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
5.2% CPI
1.0% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
1.0% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
1009
CC 05-14-2024
1009 of 1197
2021-22 1.6% CPI
2.5% CCI,
5.7% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
1.6% CPI
5.7% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
5.7% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
2020-21 2.9% CPI
6.3% CCI,
17.3% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
17.3% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
17.3% Estimated
Labor Cost
increase
Separately and as explained in the February 7 report, Parks and Recreation fees (Schedule E) are not part of the proposed fee increase because they are set by current market rates per Resolutions No. 04-350.
User Fee Cost Recovery Policy
Following City Council’s direction, staff prepared a User Fee Cost Recovery Policy for adoption to provide general guidelines for establishing and maintaining a comprehensive user fee schedule to ensure the City adequately recovers costs for the provision of services, benefits, or privileges (Services) in an efficient, legal, and accountable manner. The policy incorporates the following:
Seven-year Cost Allocation Plan and User Fee Study cycle Annual fee update following the City’s current practice A phase-in period for more significant fee increases
Target cost recovery range by service area
Sustainability Impact
No sustainability impact.
Fiscal Impact
If Council approves the proposed fee updates, with an effective date of July 14th, 2024, the proposed fee schedule adjustments are anticipated to generate additional revenues totaling $774,680 in the General Fund for Fiscal Year 2024-25. Estimated revenues for Schedules B, C, and D were determined based on the full cost recovery rates established in the fee study, incorporating an application factor where applicable (utilizing the lower rate for schedules employing multiple factors). Anticipated revenue generation from the proposed adjustments in Schedule A is expected to be minimal. Adding new charges, such as the Credit Card Transaction Fee, may deter the use of credit cards for higher-priced permits and bonds, although accurately assessing potential revenue generation remains challenging.
A decision to forego implementing these increases would result in further subsidization of service costs by the General Fund. Consequently, service expenses would compete with other General Fund allocations designated for City services benefiting the broader public. 1010
CC 05-14-2024
1010 of 1197
The recommended increase in fees and estimated revenue are summarized as follows:
Fee Schedule Additional Revenue Factor and Basis
Schedule A – General Nominal change Cost-recovery plus
2.4% CPI
Schedule B – Engineering $60,829
Cost-recovery plus
0.7% CCI,
1.0% Labor Costs
Schedule C – Planning $171,190.51
Cost-recovery plus
24% CPI,
1.0% Labor Costs
Schedule D – Building $542,659.24 Cost-recovery plus
1.0% Labor Costs
California Environmental Quality Act
Not applicable.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Jonathan Orozco, Finance Manager
Reviewed by: Kristina Alfaro, Director of Administrative Services Matt Morley, Assistant City Manager
Approved for Submission by: Pamela Wu, City Manager
Attachments:
A – FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee Schedule A – General (Redline) B – FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee Schedule B – Engineering (Redline) C – FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee Schedule C – Planning (Redline) D – FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee Schedule D – Building (Redline) E – FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee Schedule A – General (Clean) F – FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee Schedule B – Engineering (Clean) G – FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee Schedule C – Planning (Clean) H – FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee Schedule D – Building (Clean) I – Draft Resolution No. 24‐XXX approving FY 2024-25 Fee Schedules A, B, C, and D J – User Fee Study 2023
K – Cost Allocation Plan and Fee Study Staff Report
L – User Fee Cost Recovery Policy
M – Draft Resolution No. 24‐XXX User Fee Cost Recovery Policy 1011
CC 05-14-2024
1011 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule A - General
Fee Description Unit FY 2023-24 Fee FY 2023-24 Total Cost FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
Abatement Fee Actual Cost *
All Municipal Code Parking Violations (including County and State fees) Each $80.90 $80.90 $82.81 $1.91 2.4% Animal Establishment Permit Each $360.52 $369.05 $34.51 10.3% Commercial Kennel Permit $334.54
Private Kennel $334.54
Pet Shop $334.54
Grooming Business $334.54
Horse Establishment $334.54
Annual Lobbyist Registration Fee Per Lobbyist $198.24 $290.00 $296.86 $98.62 49.7% Bingo Permit Annual $201.60 $255.37 $261.41 $59.81 29.7% Business License Database Each $24.39 $29.72 $30.42 $6.03 24.7% Candidate Statement Fee (County Regulated Fee) Each Current County Registrar Cost
Current County
Registrar Cost
Current County
Registrar Cost
City Administrative Fee Each 15% 15% 15%
Code Enforcement Actual Cost *
Abatement/Graffiti Cleanup Each Actual Cost * Actual Cost * Actual Cost * Hourly rate Hourly $240.35 $246.04
Substandard Housing Re-Inspection Each $240.35 $246.04
Community Festivals - One-time Business License (correction) Each $12.59 $12.59 $12.88 $0.30 2.4% Community Festivals - Business Partners Each $64.20 $64.20 $65.72 $1.52 2.4% Community Festivals - Additional 10' x 10' space (includes an additional table a Each $11.58 $11.58 $11.85 $0.27 2.4% Community Festivals - Non-profit partners Each $11.58 $11.58 $11.85 $0.27 2.4% Compilation of New Records Each Actual Cost * Actual Cost * Actual Cost * Credit Card Transaction Fee Each 3.40% 3.40%
CVC Parking Citation Dismissals Admin Fee (State Regulated Fee) Each $33.38 $25.00 $25.00 -$8.38 -25.1% Damage to City Property
Grounds, Streets, Facilities, Traffic Engineering/Maintenance Each Actual Cost * Actual Cost * Actual Cost * Dangerous Dog Annual Registration Fee Annual $255.53 $480.70 $492.07 Sign Each $24.90 $24.90
Duplicate Business Licenses Each $12.84 $14.86 $15.21 $2.37 18.5% Event Video Taping/Editing Each Actual Cost * Actual Cost * Actual Cost * False Alarms Each $97.60 $118.86 $121.68 $24.08 24.7%
Farmers Market Each $3.21 $3.21 $3.29 $0.08 2.4%
Fingerprinting Processing (State Fee $32 plus County Fee $20) Each $66.78 $71.40 $73.09 $6.31 9.4% Flea Markets Each $13.62 $13.62 $13.94 $0.32 2.4%
Public Requests for GIS Printed Maps
Standard pre-formatted maps
Plotted maps Per Map $35.96 $36.24 $37.10 $1.14 3.2%
Printed maps Per Map $2.64 $4.83 $4.95 $2.31 87.6%
Custom request maps Per Map Actual Cost * Actual Cost * Actual Cost * Prints/plots of aerial photography (see Engineering fees) Per Map Actual Cost * Actual Cost * Actual Cost * Handbill Permit Each $158.68 $240.35 $246.04 $87.36 55.1% Renewals Each $79.34 $120.17 $123.02 $43.68 55.1%
Internet Processing Fee $2.64
Late Payment on 30 Day Delinquent City Invoices Each 12% per annum 12% per annum 12% per annum Massage Establishment Fee (Includes fingerprinting/background check and business start-up inspection) Each $357.04 $540.79 $553.58 $196.55 55.0% Renewals (Includes two inspections per year) Each $119.42 $180.26 $184.53 $65.10 54.5% Massage Managing Employee (Includes fingerprint/background check) Each $317.17 $480.70 $492.07 $174.90 55.1% Renewals Each $119.42 $180.26 $184.53 $65.10 54.5%
Massage Permit Appeal (Denial/Revocation) Each $793.57 $1,201.75 $1,230.18 $436.61 55.0% Microfilm/Microfiche Printout $0.68
Municipal Code Book Per Book Vendor Invoice Vendor Invoice Vendor Invoice New Business Monthly Reports Each $44.94 $44.57 $45.63 $0.69 1.5% Noise Variances/Special Exceptions Each $246.54 $246.54 $252.38 $5.83 2.4% Notary Fee (State Regulated Fee) Per Signature $15.00/signature $15.00/signature $15.00/signature $0.00 0.0% Outside Agency Review / Services Vendor Invoice + City
Admin Fee
Vendor Invoice + City
Admin Fee
Vendor Invoice + City
Admin Fee
Petitions for Reconsideration Each $369.81 $367.36 $376.05 $6.24 1.7% Permit Update Each $120.17 $123.02
1012
CC 05-14-2024
1012 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule A - General
Fee Description Unit FY 2023-24 Fee FY 2023-24 Total Cost FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
Photocopies - per sheet
Standard sizes Per Page $0.29 $0.29 $0.30 $0.01 3.2%
For 11 x 17 sizes or color sheets Per Page $0.67 $0.67 $0.69 $0.01 2.2% For Large format prints Per Page $33.57 $33.57 $34.36 $0.79 2.4% Fair Political Practices Commission Per Page $0.12 $0.10 $0.10 -$0.01 -11.6% Fair Political Practices Commission (older than five (5) years) Per Page $5.79 $5.00 $5.12 -$0.67 -11.6% Property Liens Administrative Fee Each $53.93 $240.35 $246.04 $192.11 356.2% Returned Check Charge (State Regulated) $33.38
First returned check Each $25.00 $25.00
Subsequent checks Each $35.00 $35.00
Sign Removal (Public Right-of-Way) (All except Political Signs) Each $6.42 $180.26 $25.00 $18.58 289.1% Sign Recovery Fee for Political Signs Each $3.85 $180.26 $25.00 $21.15 549.7% Small Income Business License Each $89.89 $89.89 $92.02 $2.13 2.4% Solicitor Permit (Includes fingerprinting) Each $317.37 $480.70 $492.07 $174.70 55.0% Renewals Each $79.62 $120.17 $123.02 $43.40 54.5%
Taxi Driver Permit (Includes fingerprinting/background check) Each $414.76 $961.40 $984.14 $569.38 137.3% Renewals Each $79.62 $120.17 $123.02 $43.40 54.5%
Tobacco Retailer (County Regulated Fee)
Application Fee Each Current County Cost Current County Cost Current County Cost Annual Fee Annual Current County Cost Current County Cost Current County Cost Trash Fees
Plan Review - Trash Enclosure No Charge
Plan Review - Trash Management Plan No Charge
Williamson Act Filings Each $142.53 $142.53 $145.91 $3.37 2.4% Use Permit
Application / Processing $1,289.23
Non-Conforming Use $344.14
Video/Audio Service
DVD/CD Each $26.97 $25.16 $25.76 -$1.21 -4.5%
Flash Drive Each $16.70 $27.16 $27.80 $11.11 66.5%
* Actual cost is: 1) Fully burdened employee costs as calculated through the 2023 Cost Allocation Plan, Employee hourly rate plus 55% for benefits and overhead, and 2) cost of materials, contractors, and supplies.
1013
CC 05-14-2024
1013 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule B - Engineering
Unit FY 2023-24 Fee FY 2023-24 Total Cost FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
Each $647 $602 $608 -$39.58 -6.1%
Each $447 $416 $420 -$26.54 -5.9%
Each $1,115 $1,057 $1,068 -$47.18 -4.2%
Each Double the permit cost Double the permit cost Double the permit cost Each $2,228 $2,195 $2,217 -$10.96 -0.5%
Each $1,785 $1,729 $1,747 -$37.61 -2.1%
Each $3,601 $3,515 $3,551 -$50.09 -1.4%
Each/% of Project 5% of Project Costs and/or
$80 per inspection
5% of Project Costs and/or
$254 per inspection
5% of Project Costs and/or
$257 per inspection $177.00 221.3%
Per Permit $524 $523 $528 $4.22 0.8%
Each $1,415 $1,415
Each $1,376 $1,338 $1,352 -$24.34 -1.8%
Each/% of Improv.
Greater of $4,015 min. or
6% of cost of
improvement
Greater of $4,842 min. or
6% of cost of
improvement
Greater of $4891 or 6% of
cost of improvement
Each $8,170 $8,299 $8,383 $213.47 2.6%
Each $13,413 $13,549 $13,687 $273.39 2.0%
Each $1,218 $1,289 $1,302 $84.44 6.9%
Per Hour $279 $315 $318 $39.00 14.0%
Per Hour $279 $315 $318 $39.00 14.0%
Each/% of Improv.
greater of $5,392 min. or
5% of cost of
improvement
Greater of $5,598 min. or
5% of cost of
improvement
Greater of $5655 or 5% of
cost of improvement $263.00 $0.05
Each/% of Improv.
greater of $10,086 min. or
6% of cost of
improvement
Greater of $10,621 min. or
6% of cost of
improvement
Greater of $10729 or 5% of
cost of improvement $643.00 $0.06
Each $1,573 $1,589
Per Hour $188 $190
Each *Cost of review + City
Administrative Fee
*Cost of review + City
Administrative Fee
*Cost of review + City
Administrative Fee
Each $542 $629 $636 $93.86 17.3%
Each $2,948 $3,486 $3,522 $573.30 19.4%
Each $1,265 $3,935 $2,177 $911.98 72.1%
Each $1,265 $3,935 $2,177 $911.98 72.1%
Each $4,069 $4,173 $4,216 $146.67 3.6%
Per Unit $6,797/unit $6,797/unit $6,797 $0.00 0.0%
Per Unit $4,215/unit $4,215/unit $4,215 $0.00 0.0%
Per s.f. $10.94/s.f. $10.94/s.f. $11 $0.00 0.0%
Per s.f. $19.15/s.f. $19.15/s.f. $19 $0.00 0.0%
Per Room $3,728/room $3,728/room $3,728 $0.00 0.0%
Per trip $6,862/trip $6,862/trip $6,862 $0.00 0.0%
Each $16 $16 $16 $0.00 0.0%
Each $90 $90 $90 $0.00 0.0%
Per Hour $279/hr $315 $318
- Single
- Annual Utility Company
- Additional Engineering Investigation or Coordination
(Includes apartments, condos, and townhomes)
- Retail
- Office
- Hotel
- Other (per PM trip)
Transportation Permit (State Regulated Fee)
- Initial Review
- Finalize Certificates
Lot Line Adjustment
Transportation Impact Fee
- Single Family
- Multi-Family
- Commercial
Professional Services 3rd Party Consultant Review
*Per Outside Agency Review/Services on Schedule A - General Public Works Confirmation
Annexation (plus County filing fee)
Certificates of Compliance
Planning Application Review
VMT Monitoring Fee
Plan Check and Inspection
- Review of Building Permit Only Stand Alone Building Permit Review Additional Plan Review - 3 or more reviews
Revisions to Plans and Permits
Review of Public/Private Improvement Plans:
- Residential
Parcel Map/Tract Map (Map Checking Fee)
- Parcel Map (1-4 lots)
- Tract Map (> 4 lots)
- Small Cell Facility Encroachment Permit
Street Cuts Miscellaneous
- Minor Street Cuts
- Major Street Cuts
- Special Major Permit (projects in excess of $30,000 or over 15 working days) Permit Extension
Crane Lift
FEE DESCRIPTION
Encroachment Permits
- Minor Encroachment Permits (Local Streets)
- Minor Encroachment Permits (Utility)
- Major Encroachment Permits (Arterials and Collectors) - Work without Permit
Grading permit
- <10,000 s.f. lot
- 10,000 s.f or greater
1014
CC 05-14-2024
1014 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule B - Engineering
Unit FY 2023-24 Fee FY 2023-24 Total Cost FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
Each $741 $730 $738 -$3.20 -0.4%
Deposit $4,525 $4,525 $4,571 $46.46 1.0%
Each No Charge $1,338 No Charge
Each $3,091 $3,168 $3,200 $108.59 3.5%
Each $4,809 $4,930 $4,980 $171.19 3.6%
Each $2,518 $2,571 $2,597 $78.96 3.1%
Each $1,540 $1,594 $1,610 $70.00 4.5%
Each $1,155 $1,113 $1,125 -$30.21 -2.6%
Each $271 $297 $300 $29.52 10.9%
Each $1,540 $1,397 $1,411 -$128.75 -8.4%
Each $1,261 $1,138 $1,149 -$111.43 -8.8%
Each No Charge $39 $40 $40 -
Each $494 $462 $466 -$28.09 -5.7%
Dwelling unit $4,671/dwelling unit $4,671/dwelling unit $4,706.62 $35.62 0.8% Per acre $6,345/acre $6,345/acre $6,389.29 $44.29 0.7%
Per acre and $4,552/acre+ $4,552/acre+ $4,583.77 $31.77 0.7% Per unit $345/unit* $345/unit* $347.41 $2.41 0.7%
Per acre $12,258/acre $12,258/acre $12,343.56 $85.56 0.7% Per acre $4,671/acre $4,671/acre $4,703.60 $32.60 0.7%
Per acre $2,359/acre $2,359/acre $2,375.47 $16.47 0.7%
No charge No charge No charge
Each $355 $431 $434 $78.36 22.1%
Each $157 $158
Each $313 $315
Each $1,789 $2,202 $2,217 $428.42 24.0%
Hour $256/hr $288 $291 $35.02 13.7%
Per Permit 5.8% 5.8%
Public Works Staff Time
Technology Fee
Initial Inspection
Re-Inspection for Violations
Storm Management Plan Fee
Public Educational Uses
Public Facility Uses
Stormwater Permit Inspections - Commercial
Plan Review Fee
Single Family
Multi-Family
Multiple Family greater than 5.2 dwelling units per acre *Maximum chargeable dwelling units of 20 units per acre.
Commercial and Industrial
Streamside Permit
Master Storm Drain Area Fees:
Low-Density Residential (Less than one dwelling unit per acre hillside zoning only) Single-Family Residential greater than one dwelling unit per acre and less than 5.2 dwelling units per acre
Permit Parking Study
- Application Phase
- Implementation phase
- Permit Parking Bi-annual Fee
- Application Phase
- Implementation phase
Certificate of Correction
Floodplain Evaluation/Elevation Certificate Review
Special Events/Parades
Block Party
Vacation of Public Street ROW/PUE
- Summary Vacation
- Full Vacation
Rural/Semi-Rural Classification Application
FEE DESCRIPTION
Banners
- Large Banners Across Stevens Creek Boulevard
1015
CC 05-14-2024
1015 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule B - Engineering
Unit FY 2023-24 Fee FY 2023-24 Total Cost FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
$105,000/DU $105,000/DU $105,000/DU $0.00 0.0%
$60,000/DU $60,000/DU $60,000/DU $0.00 0.0%
$60,000/DU $60,000/DU $60,000/DU $0.00 0.0%
$54,000/DU $54,000/DU $54,000/DU $0.00 0.0%
$30,000/DU $30,000/DU $30,000/DU $0.00 0.0%
$15,000 or proportional
to the size of the main
DU, whichever is less
$15,000 or proportional
to the size of the main
DU, whichever is less
$15,000 or proportional
to the size of the main
DU, whichever is less
$0.00 0.0%
Each $515 $1,018 $513 -$2.55 -0.5%
Each Actual costs Actual costs Actual costs
PUBLIC TREE DAMAGE OR REMOVAL FEE SCHEDULE:
This fee schedule is defined in Chapter 14.12 and establishes the fee to be paid to the City for damage to and/or removal of public trees.
Repeat offenders, intentional actors and professionals, as defined in Chapter 14.12, shall be subject to the following fees:
Public Tree Damage Fee:
Public Tree Removal Fee:
FEE = UNMODIFIED TREE VALUE x SPECIES RATING x CONDITION RATING For inputs, use the following values:
UNMODIFIED TREE Refer to Unmodified Tree Value Table
SPECIES RATING Refer to Species Rating Table
CONDITION RATING Good = 1.00, Fair = 0.75, Poor = 0.50
The fee for trees less than 4 inches in diameter shall not be reduced by species or condition rating.
The fee for each tree removed shall be based upon the unmodified value of the tree removed (based upon diameter), multiplied by the species rating, multiplied by the condition rating.
Trees larger than 40” shall have the fee determined by the most recent edition of the 'Guide for Plant Appraisal', published by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers, using the trunk formula method.
New Public Tree Cost Schedule:
Public Tree Planting Cost:
24" Street Tree
36" Street Tree or Larger
1st time offenders, as defined in Chapter 14.12, shall be subject to a fee of 10% of the Public Tree Damage Fee or 10% of the Public Tree Removal Fee as defined below or $600, whichever is higher, per public tree damaged and/or removed. No additional costs, such as stump removal, trimming, or replanting will apply. $100 per cumulative diameter inch of branch or root plus, if any, the actual costs incurred for immediate corrective pruning plus, if any, the calculated costs for future corrective pruning, as may be required to maintain the health of the tree.
10 - 20
20+
Senior Citizen Housing Dev.
ADU 750 SF or more**
* Park Land Dedication Fees are calculated per Municipal Code section 13.08. On an annual basis, Public Works Department updates the fair market value of land based on appraised values of land sales.
** ADU Park Land Dedication Fee is based on the density of the property per Municipal Code section 13.08, or proportionally to the size of the main dwelling unit as stipulated by State ADU mandates.
Park Land Dedication In-Lieu Fee*
Density of Dwelling Units/Ac
0 - 5
5 - 10
FEE DESCRIPTION
1016
CC 05-14-2024
1016 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule B - Engineering
No additional costs, such as stump removal, trimming or replanting will apply.
Unmodified Tree Value Table:
Tree size (diameter of trunk)
1” to 2” $348
2” to 3” $348
3” to 4” $1,039
4” to 5” $1,039
5” to 6” $1,404
6” to 7” $1,851
7” to 8” $2,378
8” to 9” $2,987
9” to 10” $3,677
10” to 11” $4,449
11” to 12” $5,301
12” to 13” $6,235
13” to 14” $7,249
14” to 15” $8,345
15” to 16” $9,522
16” to 17” $10,780
17” to 18” $12,120
18” to 19” $13,540
19” to 20” $15,042
20” to 21” $16,625
21” to 22” $18,290
22” to 23” $20,036
23” to 24” $21,862
24” to 25” $23,769
25” to 26” $25,758
26” to 27” $27,829
27” to 28” $29,980
28” to 29” $32,212
29” to 30” $34,527
30” to 31” $36,920
31” to 32” $39,396
32” to 33” $41,954
33” to 34” $44,593
34” to 35” $47,312
35” to 36” $50,113
36” to 37” $52,995
37” to 38” $55,958
38” to 39” $59,003
39” to 40” $62,128
Measurement shall be measured 4.5 feet above the ground level and rounded down to the nearest whole inch.
If the tree is multi-trunk, use 1.5 times the diameter of the largest trunk to determine fee.
If the tree is removed to the ground, tree inventory data will be used to determine the trunk diameter.
If there is tree damage 4-5 feet above the ground, trunk diameter is to be measured 1 foot above ground level and 1 inch is to be subtracted from the diameter to determine fee. 1017
CC 05-14-2024
1017 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule B - Engineering
Common Name Species Rating%
Acacia ACACIA 60
Blackwoodacaia ACACIA MELANOXYLON 60
Trident maple ACER BUERGERIANUM 90
Big leaf maple ACER MACROPHYLLUM** 100
Japanese maple ACER PALMATUM 90
Red maple ACER REBRUM 70
Silver maple ACER SACCHARINUM 80
California buckeye AESCULUS CALIFORNICA** 100
Red hoursechesnut AESCULUS X CARNEA 90
Tree of heaven AILANTHUS ALTISSIMA 0
Silk tree ALBIZIA JULIBRISSIN 50
Black Alder ALNUS GLUTINOSA 80
Strawberry madrone ARBUTUS MARINA 90
Madrone ARBUTUS MENZIESII 100
Hong Kong orchid BAUHINIA BLAKEANA 75
Birch BETULA ALBA 60
Incense cedar CALOCEDRUS DECURRENS 80
Horsetail tree CASUARINA EQUISETIFOLIA 75
Blue atlas cedar CEDRUS ATLANTICA** 100
Deodora cedar CEDRUS DEODARA** 100
Chinese hackberry CELTUS SINENSIS 65
Carob tree CERATONIA SILIQUA 70
Redbud(eastern) CERCIS CANADENSIS 75
Camphor tree CINNAMOMUM CAMPHORA 70
Citrus CITRUS SP 40
English hawthorn CRATAEGUS LAEVIGATA 70
Cypress CUPRESSACEAE 80
Italian cypress CUPRESSUS SEMPERVIREN 80
Japanese persimmon DIOSPYROS KAKI 40
Loquat ERIOBOTRYA DEFLEXA 60
Blue gum tree EUCALYPTUS GLOBULUS 70
Eucalyptus EUCALYPTUS SP 60
Misson fig FICUS CARICA 40
Autumn purple ash FRAXINUS AMERICANA 80
Raywood ash FRAXINUS ANGUSTIFOLIA 'RAYWOOD' 80
Moraine ash FRAXINUS HOLOTRICHA 80
Shamel ash FRAXINUS UHDEI 80
Modesto ash FRAXINUS VELUTINA 'MODESTO' 80
Australian willow GEIJERA PARVIFOLIA 80
Maidenhair GINKO BILOBA 80
Honey locust GLEDITSIA TRIACANTHOS 70
Silk oak tree GREVILLEA ROBUSTA 70
English holly ILLEX AQUIFOLIUM 40
Jacaranda JACARANDA MIMMOSIFOLIA 70
Walnut JUGLANS 70
Species Rating Table
1018
CC 05-14-2024
1018 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule B - Engineering
Common Name Species Rating%
Black walnut JUGLANS HINDSII 70
Chinese flame tree KOELREUTERIA BIPINNATA 80
Muskogee crape myrtle LAGERSTROMIA 'MUSKOGEE' 80
Nanchez crape myrtle LAGERSTROMIA 'NANCHEZ' 80
Tuscarora crape myrtle LAGERSTROMIA 'TUSCARORA' 80
Sweet bay LAURUS NOBILIS 80
Japanese privit LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM 30
American sweetgum LIQUIDAMBER STYRACIFLUA 40
Tulip tree LIRIODENDRON 60
Brisbane box tree LOPHOSTEMON CONFERTUS 90
Magnolia MAGNOLIA GRANDIFOLIA RUSSET 75
Magnolia (dwarf) MAGNOLIA GRANDIFOLIA ST MARY 75
Saucer magnolia MAGNOLIA SOLINGIANA 75
Crabapple tree MALUS FLORIBUNDA 90
Apple MALUS SP 40
Mayten tree MAYTENUS 70
Malaleuca(broad leaf) MELALEUCA LEUCADENDRA 60
Malaleuca(narrow leaf) MELALEUCA LINARIFOLIA 60
Dawn redwood METASAQUOIA GLYPTOSTROBOIDES 100
Fruitless mulberry MORUS ALBA 40
Black mulberry MORUS NIGRA 40
Myoprum MYOPORUM LAETUM 70
Oleander tree NERIUM OLEANDER 40
Olive OLEA EUROPAEA 70
Devilwood OSMANTHUS AMERICANUS 0
Palm PALM* 40
Avocado PERSEA AMERICANA 60
Red leaf photinia PHOTINIA GLABRA 60
Spruce PICEA 80
Colorado spruce PICEA PUNGENS 80
Colorado blue spruce PICEA PUNGENS 'GLAUCA' 80
Italian stone pine PINUS PINEA 90
Pine PINUS SP 30
Chinese pistacio PISTACIA CHINENSIS 80
Lemonwood tree PITTOSPORUM EUGENIOIDES 40
Japanese cheesewood PITTOSPORUM TOBIRA 40
London plane 'colombiana' PLATANUS COLUMBIANA 95
Western Sycamore PLATANUS RACEMOSA** 100
London plane 'bloodgood' PLATANUS X HISPANICA 'BLOODGOOD' 95 Yew pine PODOCURPUS MACROPHYLLUS 75
Poplar POPULUS 60
Flowering cherry PRUNUS AKEBONO 80
Wild Plum PRUNUS AMARACANA 40
Almond tree PRUNUS ALMOND 50
Apricot tree PRUNUS APRICOT 40
Species Rating Table
1019
CC 05-14-2024
1019 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule B - Engineering
Common Name Species Rating%
Fruiting cherry PRUNUS AVIUM 0
Carolina cherry PRUNUS CAROLINIANA 60
Purple leaf plum PRUNUS CERASFERA KRAUTER VESUVIUS 70
Peach tree PRUNUS PERSICA 40
Douglas fir PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII 80
Guava PSIDIUM GUAJAVA 40
Pomegranate PUNICA GRANATUM 40
Aristocrat Flowering pear tree PYRUS CALLERYANA 'ARISTOCRAT' 75 Bradford flowering pear PYRUS CALLERYANA 'BRADFORD' 75
Chanticleer flowering pear PYRUS CALLERYANA 'CHANTICLEER' 75 Evergreen flowering pear PYRUS KAWAKAMII 75
Asian pear PYRUS PYRIFOLIA 40
Oak QUERCUS 90
Coast live oak QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA** 100
White oak QUERCUS ALBA 90
Texas red oak QUERCUS BUCKEYI 90
Sierra oak QUERCUS CAMBII 90
Blue oak QUERCUS DOUGLASII** 100
Forest green oak QUERCUS FRAINETTO 90
Holly oak QUERCUS ILEX 90
Black oak QUERCUS KELLOGGII** 100
Valley oak QUERCUS LOBATA** 100
Red oak QUERCUS SUBER 90
Cork oak QUERCUS SUBER 90
Southern live oak QUERCUS VIRGINIANA 100
Interior live oak QUERCUS WISLIZENI** 100
African sumac RHUS LANCIA 70
Weeping willow SALIX BABYLONICA 40
Wild willow SALIX SCOULERIANA 0
California pepper tree SCHINUS MOLE 40
Brazilian pepper tree SCHINUS TEREBINTHEFOLIUS 40
Coast redwood SEQUIOA SEMPRIVIRONS 95
Giant sequioa SEQUOIADENDRON GIGANTEUM 80
Japanese pogoda SOPHORIA JAPONICA 70
Chinese tallow TRIADICA SEBIFERA 50
Water gum TRISTANIA LAURINA 70
Bosque chinese elm ULMAS PARVIFOLIA 'BOSQUE' 90
Chinese elm ULMUS PARVIFOLIA 70
Siberian elm ULMUS PUMILA 60
Bay laurel UMBELLULARIA CALIFORNICA** 100
Mexican fan palm WASHINGTON ROBUSTA 0
Spanish dagger yucca YUCCA GLORIOSA 0
Zelkova ZELKOVA SERRATA 65
*All palms on Palm Avenue are protected heritage trees and will be rated @ 100% **Protected tree species
Species Rating Table
1020
CC 05-14-2024
1020 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule C - Planning
DEFINITIONS
A. Parcel Map: Subdivisions, including ministerial subdivisions - up to four (4) parcels (CMC Chapter 18.20).
B. Tentative map: Subdivisions - five (5) or more parcels (CMC Chapter 18.16).
MP. Legal Noticing Fee: Assessed for all permit applications that require noticing (CMC Chapter 19.12).
KN. Extension Permit: A one-time one-year extension of the planning permit expiration date (CMC Chapter 19.12).
Note: Mixed use applications will be classified based upon the highest intensity and review process. The Director of Community Development will have discretion to classify projects based upon the above criteria.
NR. Housing Mitigation Fee: A fee assessed in accordance with the City's General Plan Housing Element, Municipal Code (CMC 19.172) and the City's LO. Appeal: A request from the project applicant or interested party to reverse or amend a decision made by the approval authority. Fee Exemption for:
Q. Special Events Permit: A request to host a special event for no more than a total of 12 calendar days in a year including, but not limited to, employee M. Sign Permit: For signs that require a public meeting such as freeway oriented signage, electronic readerboard signs etc. (CMC Chapter 19.104) HI. Exceptions: An exception to the zoning standards for which an exception process and findings are identified in the Municipal Code. These include C. Minor: for ten thousand square feet or less of commercial and/or industrial and/or office and/or other non-residential use, or six or less residential D. Major: for more than ten thousand square feet of commercial and/or industrial and/or office and/or other non-residential use, or greater than six E. Minor Architectural and Site Approval - Duplex/Residential: Architectural approval of single family homes in a planned development zoning district, G. Major Architectural and Site Approval: Architectural approval of all other development projects (CMC Chapter 19.12).
K. Preliminary Review: One round of informal review of any proposed project with written feedback from City staff.
JL. Temporary Sign Permit: A review of a temporary sign application for banners, A-frame signs and other temporary signs (CMC Chapter 19.104).
F. Minor Architectural and Site Approval: Architectural approval of the following: minor building modifications, landscaping, signs and lighting for IH. Minor Modification: An application that is administratively reviewed by staff either at an advertised public hearing/meeting or in a non-hearing J. Project Review Meeting: Request for a one hour meeting by an applicant to review a project with City staff without any written feedback. 1021
CC 05-14-2024
1021 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule C - Planning
Fee Description 1 Unit FY 2023-24 Fee FY 2023-24 Total Cost FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
Planning Staff Hourly Rate1 2 Per Hour $332 $287 $290 (42.00) -12.7% General Plan
Authorization Deposit Staff Hourly Rate Staff Hourly Rate Staff Hourly Rate Amendment Deposit Staff Hourly Rate Staff Hourly Rate Staff Hourly Rate Zoning
Zoning Map Amendment Deposit Staff Hourly Rate Staff Hourly Rate Staff Hourly Rate Zoning Text Amendment Deposit Staff Hourly Rate Staff Hourly Rate Staff Hourly Rate Single-Story Overlay District Deposit Staff Hourly Rate Staff Hourly Rate Staff Hourly Rate Study Session Deposit Staff Hourly Rate Staff Hourly Rate Staff Hourly Rate Subdivision
Parcel Map (See Definition A) Each $20,917 $27,117 $27,393 6,476.00 31.0% Tentative Map (See Definition B) Each $34,792 $46,604 $47,078 12,286.00 35.3% Conditional Use/Development Permit
Temporary Use Permit Each $4,639 $5,030 $5,081 442.00 9.5% Administrative Conditional Use Permit Each $7,682 $10,614 $10,722 3,040.00 39.6% Minor (See Definition C) Each $21,043 $25,496 $25,755 4,712.00 22.4% Major (See Definition D) Each $35,064 $38,905 $39,301 4,237.00 12.1% Amendment to Conditional Use/Development Permit
Minor (See Definition C) Each $9,666 $11,501 $11,618 1,952.00 20.2% Major (See Definition D) Each $17,654 $24,819 $25,071 7,417.00 42.0% Architectural and Site Approval Permit
Minor Duplex / Residential (See Definition E) Each $7,393 $10,584 $10,692 3,299.00 44.6% Minor (See Definition F) Each $14,557 $16,515 $16,683 2,126.00 14.6% Major (See Definition G) Each $21,667 $25,195 $25,451 3,784.00 17.5% Single Family (R-1) Residential Permits
Minor Residential Permit Each $3,796 $3,983 $4,024 228.00 6.0% Two-Story Permit without Design Review Each $4,929 $4,985 $5,035 106.00 2.2% Two-Story Permit with Design Review Each $5,915 $6,088 $6,149 234.00 4.0% Director Minor Modification (See Definition IH) Each $5,185 $5,441 $5,497 312.00 6.0% Ministerial Residential Permit
Miscellaneous Ministerial Permit Each $4,322 $4,506 $4,551 229.00 5.3% Exceptions (See Definition H I )
Fence Exception - R1 & R2 Each $1,411 $4,626 $4,673 3,262.00 231.2% Fence Exception - Other Each $4,749 $5,132 $5,184 435.00 9.2% Sign Exception Each $5,405 $6,911 $6,981 1,576.00 29.2% R-1 Exception Each $7,677 $7,742 $7,821 144.00 1.9%
Heart of the City Exception Each $21,460 $24,873 $25,126 3,666.00 17.1% Hillside Exception Each $22,241 $23,724 $23,965 1,724.00 7.8% Exception - Other Each $7,408 $7,862 $7,942 534.00 7.2% Variance Each $8,489 $8,990 $9,081 592.00 7.0%
Reasonable Accommodation Each $1,232 $3,570 $1,803 571.00 46.3% Project Review Meeting (See Definition J) Per Review $2,478.98 $2,504.00 Preliminary Application Review (See Definition K)
Single Family Per Review $2,508.49 $2,534.00
Non-Residential (Retail/Industrial/Office/Hotel)
<10,000 sf Per Review $5,435.74 $5,491.00
>10,000 sf Per Review $9,454.37 $9,550.00
Residential / Mixed Use:
Duplex Per Review $1,971.46 $1,991.00
3-6 Units Per Review $8,688.72 $8,777.00
6-50 Units Per Review $13,412.54 $13,549.00
>50 Units Per Review $19,359.32 $19,556.00
1022
CC 05-14-2024
1022 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule C - Planning
Fee Description FY 2023-24 Fee FY 2023-24 Total Cost FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee
Tree Removal Permit
Tree Removal Permit (no Arborist review required)
First Tree Per Tree $328 $1,260 $424 96.00 29.3%
Each Additional Tree Per Tree $165 $276 $167 2.00 1.2%
Tree Removal Permit (Arborist review required)
First Tree Per Tree $492 $2,305 $776 284.00 57.7%
Each Additional Tree Per Tree $247 $950 $250 3.00 1.2%
Retroactive Tree Removal (per tree) Per Tree $5,464 $5,464 $5,520 56.00 1.0% Heritage Tree Designation Each $411 $4,182 $422 11.00 2.7% Tree Management Plan Each $7,724 $7,871 $7,951 227.00 2.9% Signs
Temporary Sign Permit (See Definition JL) Each $524 $547 $553 29.00 5.5% Sign Permit (See Definition M) Each $5,405 $6,911 $7,532 2,127.00 39.4% Sign Program Each $4,242 $4,411 $4,456 214.00 5.0%
Planning Commission Interpretation Each $7,822 $7,973 $8,054 232.00 3.0% Extension of Approved Entitlements (See Definition KN) Each $2,103 $2,082 $2,103 0.00 0.0% Environmental Assessment
Environmental Impact Report (Plus State & County Filing Fees) Each Contract+Admin Fee Contract+Admin Fee Contract+Admin Fee Negative Declaration - Major (Plus State & County Filing Fees) Each Contract+Admin Fee Contract+Admin Fee Contract+Admin Fee Negative Declaration - Minor (Plus State & County Filing Fees) Each Contract+Admin Fee Contract+Admin Fee Contract+Admin Fee Categorical Exemption (Plus County Filing Fee) Each $379 $397 $401 22.00 5.8% Appeals (See Definition LO)
Planning Commission Each $379 $19,006 $505 126.00 33.2% City Council Each $379 $19,294 $505 126.00 33.2%
Miscellaneous Fees
Legal Noticing Fee (See Definition MP) Each $440 $521 $527 87.00 19.8% Mercury News Ad Each Acutal Cost + Admin
Fee Actual Cost + Admin Fee Actual Cost + Admin Fee
Zoning Verification Letter Each $555 $577 $583 28.00 5.0% Public Convenience and Necessity Letter (Alcoholic Beverage License) Each $279 $288 $291 12.00 4.3% Short-Term Rental Each $232 $405 $409 177.00 76.3%
Mobile Vending Registration Fee Each $332 $543 $548 216.00 65.1% Special Events (See Definition Q) Sition Qe Def
Large Event Each $4,836.63 $4,886.00
Small Event Each $2,161.79 $500.00
Planning Inspection Per Inspection $425.43 $430.00
Technology Fee Per Permit 5.8% 5.8%
Fees Assessed at Building Permit Issuance with Building Permits Wireless Master Plan Fees (at Building Permit Issuance) Equipment Mounted on Existing Light/Utility Pole Each $10.18 $10.18 $10.28 0.10 1.0% New Personal Wireless Facility (not mounted on light/utility pole) Each $2,218 $2,218 $2,241 23.00 1.0% Zoning, Planning, Municipal Code Fees (at Building Permit Issuance) All Non-Residential and Multi-Family (per sq.ft.) Per s.f. $0.49 $1.50 $1.52 1.03 209.4% Residential Single Family (per sq. ft.) Per s.f. $0.24 $1.50 $1.52 1.28 535.4% General Plan Office Allocation Fee (per sq. ft.) Per s.f. $0.45 $1.50 $1.52 1.07 235.8% Planning Department Review fee (New Construction and Additions) (Payable at permit submittal)
Each 20% of Plan Check and
Inspection fees
20% of Plan Check and
Inspection fees
1023
CC 05-14-2024
1023 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule C - Planning
FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY: 2 3
Housing Mitigation In-Lieu Fees 2 (See Definition N R ) Residential - Ownership (per sq. ft.)
Detached Single Family Residence Per s.f. $21.36 $21.36 $21.87 0.51 2.4% Small Lot Single Family Residence or Townhome Per s.f. $23.49 $23.49 $24.05 0.56 2.4% Multi-family Attached Townhome, Apartment, or Condominium (up to 35 du/ac)
Per s.f. $28.48 $28.48 $29.15 0.67 2.4%
Multi-family Attached Townhome, Apartment, or Condominium (over 35 du/ac)
Per s.f. $28.48 $28.48 $29.15 0.67 2.4%
Residential - Rental (per sq. ft.)
Multi-family Attached Townhome, Apartment, or Condominium (up to 35 du/ac)
Per s.f. $28.48 $28.48 $29.15 0.67 2.4%
Multi-family Attached Townhome, Apartment, or Condominium (over 35 du/ac)
Per s.f. $35.60 $35.60 $36.44 0.84 2.4%
Non-Residential (per sq. ft.)
Office, Research and Development, or Industrial Per s.f. $33.76 $33.76 $34.55 0.80 2.4% Hotel Per s.f. $16.88 $16.88 $17.28 0.40 2.4%
Self-storage, employee unit provided Per s.f. $0.63 $0.63 $0.65 0.01 2.4% Self-storage, employee unit not provided Per s.f. $1.33 $1.33 $1.36 0.03 2.4% Warehouse Per s.f. $46.89 $46.89 $48.00 1.11 2.4%
Commercial/Retail Per s.f. $14.24 $14.24 $14.58 0.34 2.4% 1 Based on 201623 Fee and Cost Allocation Plan Study by Matrix Consulting An administrative fee (15%) will be charged for outside agency review/consultant services/outside services (ads etc.) per Schedule A - General Fees.
If plans are submitted on paper, these must be sent to an outside agency for scanning. The cost of scanning the plans, plus the administrative fee per Schedule A - General Fees will be charged. 12 Applications may be subject to a Planning Staff Hourly Rate fee for applicable staff time, and vendor invoice. These fees apply to projects that require a level of staff support greater than the scope of work 2 3
All Housing Mitigation Fees are assessed in accordance with the BMR Housing Mitigation Manual. Non-residential Housing Mitigation In-lieu Fees are based on the 2015 and the 2020 Supplement to the Non1 All application fees except those project subject to the Planning Staff Hourly Rate fee (see note 2) allow for two rounds of review. Any submissions beyond two shall be subject to a fee equal to 50% of the total pe 1024
CC 05-14-2024
1024 of 1197
City of Cupertino, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fee Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 1 Plan Check and Inspection Fees
Related IBC
Class
Building Use
(e.g., IBC Occupancy Type) Sq. Ft. Permit Tech Cost
Plan Check
Cost
Inspection
Cost
Plan Check
Cost Inspection Cost
A Assembly 250 $117 $4,162 $3,918 $110.97 $116.14
1,250 $233 $5,271 $4,962 $110.97 $125.36
2,500 $233 $6,658 $6,529 $88.78 $4.67
5,000 $350 $8,878 $6,529 $22.19 $34.82
12,500 $350 $10,542 $9,141 $19.98 $30.18
25,000 $467 $13,039 $12,797 $52.16 $53.06
A A Occupancy Tenant Improvements 500 $233 $3,329 $3,918 $41.62 $76.96 2,500 $467 $4,162 $5,223 $44.39 $73.13
5,000 $467 $5,271 $7,052 $38.84 $4.67
10,000 $700 $7,213 $7,052 $7.40 $19.15
25,000 $700 $8,323 $9,924 $7.77 $16.60
50,000 $934 $10,265 $13,842 $20.53 $29.55
B Business 1,000 $233 $5,271 $5,746 $34.68 $51.54
5,000 $467 $6,658 $7,574 $38.84 $47.01
10,000 $467 $8,600 $9,924 $30.52 $25.84
20,000 $700 $11,652 $12,275 $6.47 $6.09
50,000 $700 $13,594 $14,103 $6.66 $11.44
100,000 $934 $16,923 $19,588 $16.92 $20.52
B B Occupancy Tenant Improvements 300 $117 $4,162 $3,134 $92.48 $118.55 1,500 $233 $5,271 $4,440 $92.48 $69.65
3,000 $233 $6,658 $5,485 $83.23 $3.89
6,000 $350 $9,155 $5,485 $15.41 $26.12
15,000 $350 $10,542 $7,835 $16.65 $19.93
30,000 $467 $13,039 $10,708 $43.46 $37.25
E Educational 100 $117 $4,162 $3,134 $277.43 $290.35
500 $233 $5,271 $4,179 $277.43 $313.40
1,000 $233 $6,658 $5,746 $249.69 $11.67
2,000 $350 $9,155 $5,746 $46.24 $78.35
5,000 $350 $10,542 $8,096 $49.94 $65.02
10,000 $467 $13,039 $11,230 $130.39 $116.97
E E Occupancy Tenant Improvements 100 $117 $3,052 $3,134 $208.08 $225.05 500 $233 $3,884 $3,918 $221.95 $261.17
1,000 $233 $4,994 $5,223 $166.46 $11.67
2,000 $350 $6,658 $5,223 $36.99 $69.65
5,000 $350 $7,768 $7,313 $38.84 $59.79
10,000 $467 $9,710 $10,186 $97.10 $106.52
F Factory Industrial 1,000 $233 $5,826 $6,007 $20.81 $45.01 5,000 $467 $6,658 $7,574 $33.29 $47.01
10,000 $467 $8,323 $9,924 $36.07 $25.84
20,000 $700 $11,930 $12,275 $5.55 $6.09
50,000 $700 $13,594 $14,103 $3.33 $11.44
100,000 $934 $15,259 $19,588 $15.26 $20.52
F F Occupancy Tenant Improvements 1,000 $233 $4,716 $4,701 $27.74 $45.01 5,000 $467 $5,826 $6,268 $33.29 $41.79
10,000 $467 $7,491 $8,357 $27.74 $2.33
20,000 $700 $10,265 $8,357 $5.55 $11.32
50,000 $700 $11,930 $11,753 $5.55 $9.87
100,000 $934 $14,704 $16,454 $14.70 $17.39
H High Hazard 100 $117 $5,826 $4,179 $346.79 $355.64
500 $233 $7,213 $5,485 $443.89 $313.40
1,000 $233 $9,433 $7,052 $332.92 $11.67
2,000 $350 $12,762 $7,052 $73.98 $95.76
5,000 $350 $14,981 $9,924 $72.13 $80.69
10,000 $467 $18,588 $13,842 $185.88 $143.09
H H Occupancy Tenant Improvements 100 $117 $3,329 $3,134 $208.08 $290.35 500 $233 $4,162 $4,179 $277.43 $313.40
1,000 $233 $5,549 $5,746 $194.20 $11.67
2,000 $350 $7,491 $5,746 $46.24 $78.35
5,000 $350 $8,878 $8,096 $38.84 $65.02
10,000 $467 $10,820 $11,230 $108.20 $116.97
I Institutional 500 $233 $6,658 $4,440 $83.23 $90.02
2,500 $467 $8,323 $6,007 $99.88 $73.13
5,000 $467 $10,820 $7,835 $77.68 $4.67
10,000 $700 $14,704 $7,835 $16.65 $22.63
25,000 $700 $17,201 $11,230 $16.65 $17.65
50,000 $934 $21,362 $15,409 $42.72 $32.69
I I Occupancy Tenant Improvements 100 $117 $4,162 $3,134 $277.43 $290.35 500 $233 $5,271 $4,179 $277.43 $261.17
1,000 $233 $6,658 $5,485 $249.69 $11.67
Base Cost1 Cost for each Add. 100 Sq. Ft.1,2
1025
CC 05-14-2024
1025 of 1197
City of Cupertino, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fee Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 1 Plan Check and Inspection Fees
2,000 $350 $9,155 $5,485 $46.24 $78.35
5,000 $350 $10,542 $7,835 $49.94 $59.79
10,000 $467 $13,039 $10,708 $130.39 $111.75
M Mercantile 2,000 $350 $7,768 $6,529 $27.74 $27.23
10,000 $700 $9,988 $8,357 $27.74 $28.73
20,000 $700 $12,762 $11,230 $22.19 $1.75
40,000 $1,050 $17,201 $11,230 $5.09 $7.84
100,000 $1,050 $20,253 $15,931 $4.99 $6.62
200,000 $1,400 $25,246 $22,200 $12.62 $11.80
M M Occupancy Tenant Improvements 300 $233 $3,329 $3,656 $69.36 $128.27 1,500 $467 $4,162 $4,962 $92.48 $104.47
3,000 $467 $5,549 $6,529 $64.73 $7.78
6,000 $700 $7,491 $6,529 $15.41 $31.92
15,000 $700 $8,878 $9,402 $12.95 $24.19
30,000 $934 $10,820 $12,797 $36.07 $45.77
R-1 Residential—Hotels & Motels 3,000 $350 $9,155 $7,574 $20.81 $22.51 15,000 $700 $11,652 $9,924 $22.19 $20.89
30,000 $700 $14,981 $13,059 $17.57 $1.17
60,000 $1,050 $20,253 $13,059 $3.70 $6.09
150,000 $1,050 $23,582 $18,543 $3.88 $5.11
300,000 $1,400 $29,408 $25,856 $9.80 $9.09
R-2 Residential—Apartment Building 800 $233 $7,213 $6,007 $60.69 $64.43 4,000 $467 $9,155 $7,835 $69.36 $58.76
8,000 $467 $11,930 $10,186 $52.02 $2.92
16,000 $700 $16,091 $10,186 $11.56 $17.41
40,000 $700 $18,865 $14,364 $11.79 $14.95
80,000 $934 $23,582 $20,110 $29.48 $26.30
R-2 Residential—Apartment Building 800 $233 $277 $6,007 $0.00 $64.43 - Repeat Unit 4,000 $467 $277 $7,835 $0.00 $58.76
8,000 $467 $277 $10,186 $0.00 $2.92
16,000 $700 $277 $10,186 $1.16 $17.41
40,000 $700 $555 $14,364 $0.00 $14.95
80,000 $934 $555 $20,110 $0.69 $26.30
R-3 Dwellings—Custom Homes, Models, 1,000 $233 $5,271 $6,268 $18.50 $52.23 First Master Plan 2,500 $233 $5,549 $7,052 $73.98 $52.23 4,000 $233 $6,658 $7,835 $13.87 $76.96
6,000 $467 $6,936 $9,141 $55.49 $26.12
8,000 $467 $8,046 $9,663 $13.87 $76.96
10,000 $700 $8,323 $10,969 $83.23 $116.69
R-3 Dwellings—Production Phase 1,000 $117 $555 $4,440 $0.00 $112.25 of Master Plan (Repeats) 2,500 $233 $555 $6,007 $18.50 $121.88 4,000 $233 $832 $7,835 $13.87 $11.67
6,000 $467 $1,110 $7,835 $13.87 $169.76
8,000 $467 $1,387 $11,230 $13.87 $220.61
10,000 $700 $1,665 $15,409 $16.65 $161.09
R-3 Group Care 1,000 $233 $6,104 $6,007 $41.62 $58.07
5,000 $467 $7,768 $8,096 $44.39 $47.01
10,000 $467 $9,988 $10,447 $36.07 $2.33
20,000 $700 $13,594 $10,447 $7.40 $14.80
50,000 $700 $15,814 $14,887 $7.77 $11.96
100,000 $934 $19,698 $20,632 $19.70 $21.57
R R Occupancy Tenant Improvements 80 $233 $2,497 $3,395 $173.40 $326.46 400 $233 $3,052 $4,440 $208.08 $326.46
800 $233 $3,884 $5,746 $173.40 $29.18
1,600 $467 $5,271 $5,746 $34.68 $108.82
4,000 $467 $6,104 $8,357 $41.62 $77.66
8,000 $700 $7,768 $11,230 $97.10 $149.13
S Storage 600 $233 $4,716 $4,179 $57.80 $64.14
3,000 $467 $6,104 $5,485 $55.49 $60.94
6,000 $467 $7,768 $7,313 $46.24 $3.89
12,000 $700 $10,542 $7,313 $9.25 $17.41
30,000 $700 $12,207 $10,447 $10.17 $13.84
60,000 $934 $15,259 $14,364 $25.43 $25.50
S S Occupancy Tenant Improvements 600 $233 $3,884 $3,918 $46.24 $64.14 3,000 $467 $4,994 $5,223 $46.24 $60.94
6,000 $467 $6,381 $7,052 $36.99 $3.89
12,000 $700 $8,600 $7,052 $7.71 $15.96
30,000 $700 $9,988 $9,924 $8.32 $13.84
60,000 $934 $12,485 $13,842 $20.81 $24.63
U Accessory 40
200
400
1026
CC 05-14-2024
1026 of 1197
City of Cupertino, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fee Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 1 Plan Check and Inspection Fees
800
1,000 $233 $2,219 $3,656 $27.74 $168.37
2,000 $350 $2,497 $5,223 $41.62 $110.30
4,000 $467 $3,329 $7,313 $83.23 $194.49
Standard Comm. Foundation 500 $233 $2,774 $3,918 $27.74 $76.96 w/o Podium 2,500 $467 $3,329 $5,223 $44.39 $62.68
5,000 $467 $4,439 $6,790 $33.29 $4.67
10,000 $700 $6,104 $6,790 $5.55 $19.15
25,000 $700 $6,936 $9,663 $6.66 $15.56
50,000 $934 $8,600 $13,320 $17.20 $28.51
Standard Comm. Foundation 500 $233 $3,052 $4,179 $41.62 $76.96 with Podium 2,500 $467 $3,884 $5,485 $44.39 $73.13
5,000 $467 $4,994 $7,313 $33.29 $4.67
10,000 $700 $6,658 $7,313 $7.40 $20.89
25,000 $700 $7,768 $10,447 $7.77 $16.60
50,000 $934 $9,710 $14,364 $19.42 $30.60
All Shell Buildings 500 $233 $3,329 $3,656 $41.62 $76.96 2,500 $467 $4,162 $4,962 $55.49 $62.68
5,000 $467 $5,549 $6,529 $38.84 $4.67
10,000 $700 $7,491 $6,529 $9.25 $19.15
25,000 $700 $8,878 $9,402 $7.77 $14.51
50,000 $934 $10,820 $12,797 $21.64 $27.46
1 At Building Permit submittal, a Planning Division Review fee of 20% shall be collected (see Table 3 - Misc. Items) 2 Each additional 100 square feet, or portion thereof, up to the next highest project size threshold. 1027
CC 05-14-2024
1027 of 1197
FY 2023-24 FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25
FEE DESCRIPTION UNIT Fee Total Cost Prop. Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
STAND ALONE M/E/P PERMIT FEES
Travel and Documentation each $82
Permit Issuance each $62
MECHANICAL FEES
Mechanical Permit Fee per hour $82 $263 $266 184.00 224.4% Stand Alone Mechanical Plan Check (hourly rate) per hour $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5% Other Mechanical Inspections (hourly rate) per hour $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5% MECHANICAL UNIT FEES:
Install/Relocate forced air furnace or burner (including attached ducts and vents) up to and including 100,000 Btu/h (each)
up to and including 100,000 Btu/h each $243
over 100,000 Btu/h each $243
Install/Relocate floor furnace, including vent (each) each $121 Install or relocate suspended heater, recessed wall heater, or floor-mounted unit Residential each $121
Commercial each $243
Install, relocate or replace appliance vent installed and not included in an appliance permit
Residential each $121
Commercial each $243
Repair/Alter/Add heating appliance, refrigeration unit, cooling unit, absorption unit, mini-split system/heat pump, or each heating, cooling, absorption, or evaporative cooling system, including installation of controls and/or ducts Residential each $121
Commercial each $243
Install or relocate boiler or compressor
up to and including 3HP, or absorption system up to and including 100,000 each $243 over 3HP and up to and including 15 HP, or absorption system over 100,000 Btu/h and up to and including 500,000 Btu/h each $243
over 15 HP and up to and including 30 HP, or absorption system over 500,000 Btu/h and up to and including 1,000,000 Btu/h each $305
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 2 Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing Fees 1028
CC 05-14-2024
1028 of 1197
FY 2023-24 FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25
FEE DESCRIPTION UNIT Fee Total Cost Prop. Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 2 Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing Fees over 30 HP and up to and including 50 HP, or absorption system over 1,000,000 Btu/h and up to and including 1,750,000 Btu/h each $305 over 50 HP, or absorption system over 1,750,000 Btu/h each $364 Air-handling unit, including attached ducts. (Note: this fee shall not apply to an airhandling unit that is a portion of a factory-assembled appliance, cooling unit, evaporative cooler, or absorption unit for which a permit is required elsewhere) Residential each $121
Commercial each $364
Air-handling unit over 10,000 CFM each $243
Ventilation fan connected to a single duct each $121
Ventilation system that is not a portion of any heating or air-conditioning system authorized by a permit each $182
Install or relocate HVAC system or portion there of
Residential each $259 $261
Commercial each $388 $392
Hood installation that is served by mechanical exhaust, including the ducts for such hood
Residential each $121 $129 $131 10.00 8.3%
Commercial each $364 $517 $522 158.00 43.4%
Any other piece of equipment or appliance not listed in Mechanical schedule.
Appliance or piece of equipment not classed in other appliance categories, or for which no other fee is listed
each $182 $259 $261 79.00 43.4%
Electrical Permit Fee per hourEach $82 $263 $266 184.00 224.4% Electrical Plan Check per hour $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5% Electrical Inspections per hour $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5% ELECTRICAL UNIT FEES:
Residential Whole-House Rewire (up to 2500 sq ft) each $486 $517 $522 36.00 7.4% Each Additional 1000 sq ft each 1,000 sf $243 $259 $261 18.00 7.4% Receptacle, switch, lighting, or other outlets at which current is used or controlled, except services, feeders, and meters
First 20 first 20 $82 $86 $87 5.00 6.1%
Each Additional each $7 $9 $9 2.00 28.6%
ELECTRICAL FEES
1029
CC 05-14-2024
1029 of 1197
FY 2023-24 FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25
FEE DESCRIPTION UNIT Fee Total Cost Prop. Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 2 Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing Fees Lighting fixtures, sockets, or other lamp-holding devices First 20 first 20 $121 $129 $131 10.00 8.3%
Each Additional each $9 $9 $9 0.00 0.0%
Pole or platform-mounted lighting fixtures each $26 $30 $30 4.00 15.4% Theatrical-type lighting fixtures or assemblies each $24 Appliances (Install / Repair / Replace)
Residential each $44 $44
Commercial each $85 $86 Fixed residential appliances or receptacle outlets for same, including wallmounted electric ovens; counter mounted cooking tops; electric ranges; selfcontained room console or through-wall air conditioners; space heaters; food waste grinders; dishwashers; washing machines; water heaters; clothes dryers; or other motor-operated appliances not exceeding one horsepower (HP) in rating
each $40
Residential appliances and self-contained factory-wired, nonresidential appliances not exceeding one horsepower (HP), kilowatt (kW), or kilovoltampere (kVA) in rating, including medical and dental devices; food, beverage, and ice cream cabinets; illuminated show cases; drinking fountains; vending machines; laundry machines; or other similar types of equipment each $82
Power Apparatus - Generator/Transformer or Similar (Install/Repair/Replace) Residential each $259 $261
Commercial each $388 $392
Motors, generators, transformers, rectifiers, synchronous converters, capacitors, industrial heating, air conditioners and heat pumps, cooking or baking equipment, and other apparatus. Rating in horsepower (HP), kilowatts (kW), or kilovolt-amperes (kVA), or kilovolt-amperes-reactive (kVAR) each $243
Busways
Trolley and plug-in-type busways each 100 lf $121
Signs, Outline Lighting, and Marquees
Supplied from one branch circuit each $82
Additional branch circuits within the same sign, outline lighting system, or marquee
each $40
Services (including Temporary Power)
600 volts or less, up to 200 amperes in rating each $82 $86 $87 5.00 6.1% 600 volts or less, 201 to 1000 amperes in rating each $121 $259 $261 140.00 115.7% Over 600 volts or over 1000 amperes in rating each $243 $388 $392 149.00 61.3% Any other Electrical apparatus, conduits, and conductors not listed in Electrical Schedule. Electrical apparatus, conduits, and conductors for which a permit is required, but for which no fee is herein set forth
each $243 $259 $261 18.00 7.4%
1030
CC 05-14-2024
1030 of 1197
FY 2023-24 FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25
FEE DESCRIPTION UNIT Fee Total Cost Prop. Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 2 Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing Fees
PLUMBING/GAS FEES
Plumbing/Gas Permit Fee per hourEach $82 $263 $266 184.00 224.4% Stand Alone Plumbing Plan Check per hourEach $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5% Other Plumbing and Gas Inspections per hourEach $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5% PLUMBING/GAS UNIT FEES:
Residential Whole-House Water Re-Pipelumbing (up to 2500 sq ft) each $486 $517 $522 36.00 7.4% Each Additional 1000 sq ft each 1,000 sf $243 $259 $261 18.00 7.4% Plumbing fixture or trap or set of fixtures on one trap, including water, drainage piping, and backflow protection each $16
Building sewer lateral (Install / Repair / Replace) or sewer clean-out Residential each $62 $65 $65 3.00 4.8%
Commercial each $121 $129 $131 10.00 8.3%
Sewer Clean-out (Install/Repair/Replace)
Residential each $65 $65
Commercial each $129 $131
Building Drain/Waste/Vent Repair
Residential per fixture $18 $18
Commercial per fixture $26 $26
Rainwater system inside building per drain $16
Private sewage disposal system each $243
Water Heater Replacement / Installation - All Types (Gas or Solar) and/or Vent Residential each $62 $65 $65 3.00 4.8%
Commercial each $182 $194 $196 14.00 7.7%
Industrial waste pretreatment interceptor, including its trap and vent, excepting kitchen-type grease interceptors functioning as fixture traps Interceptors - Grease/Sand (Install/Repair/Replace)
each $182 $194 $196 14.00 7.7%
Install, alter or repair water piping and/or water treating equipment Water Treatment System (Install/Repair/Replace) each $82 $86 $87 5.00 6.1% Repair/Alter drainage or vent piping each fixture $82
Lawn sprinkler system on any one meter, including backflow protection devices each $121 Backflow devices not included in other fee services (e.g., building/trailer park each $121 Atmospheric-type vacuum breakers not included in other fee services (e.g., building/trailer park sewer) each 5 $121
Gas piping (Install/Repair/Replace) system per outlet each 4 $121 $129 $131 10.00 8.3% Water Service Install or Replace Water Meter / Service each $62 $65 $65 3.00 4.8% Partial Water Re-pipe
Residential per fixture $24 $26 $26 2.00 8.3%
Commercial per fixture $15 $17 $17 2.00 13.3%
Any other device/fixture not listed in Plumbing Schedule (Install/Repair/Replace) each $129 $131 1031
CC 05-14-2024
1031 of 1197
Work Item Unit FY 2023-24 Fee FY 2023-24
Total Cost
FY 2024-25
Proposed Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
Standard Hourly Rate - Building Per hour $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5% Accessibility Hardship Exemption 1 hour Each $243 $275 $277 34.00 14.0% Acoustical Review
Single Family Home/Duplex—New Each $608 $649 $655 47.00 7.7% Single Family Home/Duplex—Addition/Alteration Each $364 $382 $386 22.00 6.0% Multi-Family/Commercial Each $608 $649 $655 47.00 7.7%
Additions (Non Hillside R3 Occupancy) - Plan Check Fees Plan Check Fees (up to 250 sq. ft.) up to 250 sf Each $487 $2,428 $1,159 672.00 138.0% Plan Check Fees (251 - 499 sq. ft.) 251-499 sf Each $971 $4,625 $2,236 1,265.00 130.3% Plan Check Fees (500-999 sq. ft.) Each $5,724 $2,767
Additions (Non Hillside R3 Occupancy) - Inspection Fees Inspection Fees (up to 250 sq. ft.) up to 250 sf Each $1,213 $3,103 $1,874 661.00 54.5% Inspection Fees (251 - 499 sq. ft.) 251-499 sf Each $1,456 $4,137 $2,392 936.00 64.3% Inspection Fees (500-999 sq. ft.) Each $5,171 $2,990
Accessory Buildings - Residential
Accessory Buildings (Up to 499 sq. ft.) Each $1,699 $1,716 Accessory Buildings (500 - 999 sq. ft.) Each $2,491 $2,516 Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) - Plan Check Fees
Plan Check Fees (up to 499 sq. ft.) up to 499 sf Each $971 $2,428 $2,453 1,482.00 152.6% Plan Check Fees (500 - 999 sq. ft.) 500-999 sf Each $1,940 $3,527 $3,563 1,623.00 83.7% Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) - Inspection Fees
Inspection Fees (up to 499 sq. ft.) up to 499 sf Each $1,456 $2,585 $2,612 1,156.00 79.4% Inspection Fees (500 - 999 sq. ft.) 500-999 sf Each $2,423 $3,620 $3,656 1,233.00 50.9% Address Assignment Per hour $243 $231 $233 (10.00) -4.1% Board of Appeals Per hour $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5%
Clerical Fee 1/2 hour $121 $116 $117 (4.00) -3.3%
Alternate Materials and Methods of Construction Per hour $243 $253 $255 12.00 4.9% Antenna—Telecom Facility
Radio Each $608 $454 $458 (150.00) -24.7%
Cellular/Mobile Phone, alterations to existing facility Each $486 $649 $655 169.00 34.8% Cellular/Mobile Phone, free-standing Each $1,335 $2,248 $2,271 936.00 70.1% Cellular/Mobile Phone, attached to building Each $1,094 $1,182 $1,194 100.00 9.1% Arbor/Trellis Each $487 $649 $655 168.00 34.5%
Awning/Canopy (supported by building) Each $487 $649 $655 168.00 34.5% Balcony Addition Each $1,094 $1,572 $1,588 494.00 45.2% Battery Energy Storage System up to three (3) $243 $649 $655 412.00 169.5% Each Additional Each $121 $382 $386 265.00 219.0%
Below Market Rate
Escrow Inspection % of Sale Price 0.52% 0.52%
Carport Each $850 $907 $916 66.00 7.8%
Certifications
Special Inspector Qualifications (initial review) Each $487 $506 $511 24.00 4.9% Special Inspector Qualifications (renewal / update) Each $243 $231 $233 (10.00) -4.1% Chimney (new) Each $729 $907 $916 187.00 25.7%
Chimney Repair Each $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2%
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 3 Miscellaneous Items
1032
CC 05-14-2024
1032 of 1197
Work Item Unit FY 2023-24 Fee FY 2023-24
Total Cost
FY 2024-25
Proposed Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 3 Miscellaneous Items
Close Existing Openings
Interior wall Each $486
Exterior wall Each $729
Commercial Coach (per unit) Each $1,094 $1,182 $1,194 100.00 9.1% Covered Porch Each $850 $907 $916 66.00 7.8%
Deck (wood) Each $850 $907 $916 66.00 7.8%
Deck Railing Each $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2%
Deferred Submittal (2 hour minimum) based on work item $255 $266 Demolition
Multi-Family and Commercial (up to 3,000 sf) Each base $608 $764 $772 164.00 27.0% Multi-Family and Commercial (each additional 3,000 sf) Each 3,000 sf $243 $267 $269 26.00 10.7% Residential (R-3 Occ) (up to 3,000 sf) Each base $487 $764 $772 285.00 58.5% Residential (R-3 Occ) (each additional 3,000 sf) Each 3,000 sf $243 $267 $269 26.00 10.7% Swimming Pool Residential Each $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2% Swimming Pool Multi-Family and Commercial (up to 3,000 sf) Each base $729 $770 $778 49.00 6.7% Swimming Pool Multi-Family and Commercial (each additional 3,000 sf) Each 3,000 sf $243 $259 $261 18.00 7.4% Disabled Access Compliance Inspection Per hour $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5% Door
New door (non structural) Each $364 $382 $386 22.00 6.0% New door (structural shear wall/masonry) Each $487 $649 $655 168.00 34.5% Duplicate / Replacement Job Card Each $121 $116 $117 (4.00) -3.3% Electric Vehicle Charging Station Each $243 $382 $266 23.00 9.5% Extensions
Plan Check Applications (within 180 days of Submittal) 1 hour $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5% Permits (within 180 days of Issuance)
Start construction, without plans 1/2 hour $121 $137 $139 18.00 14.9% Resume or complete construction, without plans 1/2 hour $121 $137 $139 18.00 14.9% Start construction, with plans 1 hour $243 $275 $277 34.00 14.0% Resume or complete construction, with plans 2 hours $486 $549 $555 69.00 14.2% Fence
Non-masonry, over 7 feet in height up to 100 l.f. $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2% Non-masonry, each additional 100 l.f. Each 100 l.f. $121 $129 $131 10.00 8.3% Masonry, over 7 feet in height up to 100 l.f. $850 $907 $916 66.00 7.8% Masonry, each additional 100 l.f. Each 100 l.f. $487 $517 $522 35.00 7.2% Fireplace
Masonry Each $850 $907 $916 66.00 7.8%
Pre-Fabricated/Metal Each $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2%
Flag pole (over 20 feet in height) Each $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2% Foundation Repair Each $1,094 $1,166 $1,178 84.00 7.7%
1033
CC 05-14-2024
1033 of 1197
Work Item Unit FY 2023-24 Fee FY 2023-24
Total Cost
FY 2024-25
Proposed Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 3 Miscellaneous Items
Garage / Agricultural Buildings
Wood frame up to 1,000 sf Each $1,577
Masonry up to 1,000 sf Each $2,066
Green Building Deposit - Third Party Certification Process Single-Family Residential sf $2/sf, $1,000 max.
2/sf, $20,000 min;
$40,000 max.
2/sf, $35,000 min;
$75,000 max.
Inspections
Pre-Inspection Fee Per hour $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5%
Standard Inspection Hourly Rate Per hour $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5% Progress Inspection Per hour $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5%
Partial Inspection Per hour $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5%
Courtesy Inspection - 2 hour minimum Per hour 486 or 2 hr min. $256 $266 23.00 9.5% Cancelled inspection w/out advance notice 1 Per hour $243 $256 $266 23.00 9.5% Reinspection 1 Per hour $243 $256 $266 23.00 9.5%
Outside of normal business hours (24 hour minimum) Per hour 486 or 2 hr min. $305 $308 65.00 26.7% Inspection Supplemental Fee (Projects that require more inspections than average, the Building Official may charge additional inspection fees) First 1/2 hour minimum first 1/2 hour $121 $129 $131 10.00 8.3% Each Additional hour Per hour $243 $259 $261 18.00 7.4% Life Safety Report Each $1,456
Lighting pole Each $608 $649 $655 47.00 7.7%
each additional pole Each $243 $267 $269 26.00 10.7%
Modular Structures Each $1,094 $923 $933 (161.00) -14.7% Modification of Technical Code 1 hour $243 $263 $266 23.00 9.5% Occupancy
Certificate of Occupancy/Completion Each $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2% Temporary Occupancy Permit Per six months $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2% Partition—Commercial, Interior (up to 30 l.f.) up to 30 l.f. $729 $778 $786 57.00 7.8% Additional partition Each 30 l.f. $243 $259 $261 18.00 7.4% Partition—Residential, Interior (up to 30 l.f.) up to 30 l.f. $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2% Additional partition Each 30 l.f. $121 $259 $261 140.00 115.7% Patio Cover / Gazebo
Wood frame up to 300 sf $584 $923 $933 349.00 59.8%
Metal frame up to 300 sf $584 $923 $933 349.00 59.8%
Other frame up to 300 sf $816 $923 $933 117.00 14.3%
Additional patio Each 300 sf $350 $396 $400 50.00 14.3% Enclosed prefabricated Sun Room up to 300 sf $816 $907 $916 100.00 12.3% Additional Sun Rooms Each 300 sf $467
Non-Residential sf
Multi-Family Residential sf
1034
CC 05-14-2024
1034 of 1197
Work Item Unit FY 2023-24 Fee FY 2023-24
Total Cost
FY 2024-25
Proposed Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 3 Miscellaneous Items
Photovoltaic System
Residential:
Systems up to 15kW Each $427 $450 $450 23.00 5.4%
Each Additional kW Above 15kW Each Addl kW $15 $15
Multi-Family and Commercial:
Multi-Family Res/Commercial, up to 8 kilowatts Systems up to 50kW up to 8 kW Each $608 $1,000 $1,000 392.00 64.5% Multi-Family Res/Commercial, each additional 1 kilowatt Each 1 addl kW $62 $7 $7 (55.00) -88.7% Each Additional kW Above 250kW Each addl kW $5 $5
Thermal System
Residential:
Systems up to 10kW Each $450 $450
Each Additional kW Above 10kW Each addl kW $15 $15
Multi-Family and Commercial:
Systems up to 30kW Each $1,000 $1,000
Each Additional kW between 30kW and 260kW Each addl kW $7 $7 Each Additional kW Above 260kW Each addl kW $5 $5
Pile Foundation
Cast in Place Concrete (first 10 piles) up to 10 $1,094 $1,182 $1,194 100.00 9.1% Additional Piles (increments of 10) Each 10 $729 $792 $800 71.00 9.7% Driven (steel, pre-stressed concrete) up to 10 $1,094 $1,182 $1,194 100.00 9.1% Additional Piles (increments of 10) Each 10 $729 $792 $800 71.00 9.7% Product Review Per hour $243 $253 $255 12.00 4.9%
Plan Review
Standard Plan Review Hourly Rate Per hour $243 $275 $277 34.00 14.0% Overtime Plan Review (2 4 hour minimum) Per hour 486 or 2 hr min. $321 $325 82.00 33.7% Pre-Submittal Plan Review (2 hour minimum) Per hour 486 or 2 hr min. $275 $277 34.00 14.0% Expedited Plan Review Each 1.5x Plan
Check Fee
1.5x Plan
Check Fee
Plan Review Supplemental Fee (after 2nd review)
First 1/2 hour minimum first 1/2 Per hour $121 $275 $278 157.00 129.8% Each Additional hour Per hour $243
Pre-Construction Meeting Each $460 $446 $450 (10.00) -2.2% Remodel—Residential
Kitchen (up to 300 sq. ft.) up to 300 sf Each $971 $1,028 $1,039 68.00 7.0% Bath (up to 300 sq. ft.) up to 300 sf Each $971 $1,028 $1,039 68.00 7.0% Other Remodel (up to 300 sq. ft.) up to 300 sf Each $729 $907 $916 187.00 25.7% Additional remodel (per sq. ft. above 300) Each 300 sf Per sf $364 $2.26 $2.29 (361.71) -99.4% Other Remodel (1000 sq. ft.) 1000 sfEach $2,308 $2,491 $2,516 208.00 9.0% Additional remodel (per sq. ft. above 1000) Each 300 sf Per sf $364 $0.53 $0.53 (363.47) -99.9% Other Remodel (2500+ sq. ft.) 2500 sfEach $3,037 $3,282 $3,316 279.00 9.2% Additional remodel (per sq. ft. above 2500) Each 300 sf Per sf $364.00 $0.26 $0.27 (363.73) -99.9% Re-roof
Residential (maximum $500 per building) Each 100 sf $26 $25 $25 (1.00) -3.8% Multi-Family Dwelling (maximum $500 per building) Each 100 sf $26 $25 $25 (1.00) -3.8% Commercial
Commercial (first 5,000 sf) Each $608 $633 $639 31.00 5.1% Commercial (each additional 2,500 sf) Each 2,500 sf $243 $259 $261 18.00 7.4% Retaining Wall (concrete or masonry)
Standard (up to 50 l.f.) up to 50 l.f. $1,094 $1,182 $1,194 100.00 9.1% Additional retaining wall Each 50 l.f. $729 $792 $800 71.00 9.7% Special Design, 3-10' high (up to 50 l.f.) up to 50 l.f. $1,577 $1,715 $1,733 156.00 9.9% Additional retaining wall Each 50 l.f. $971 $1,050 $1,061 90.00 9.3% Special Design, over 10' high (up to 50 l.f.) up to 50 l.f. $1,821 $1,974 $1,994 173.00 9.5% Additional retaining wall Each 50 l.f. $1,213 $1,309 $1,322 109.00 9.0% 1035
CC 05-14-2024
1035 of 1197
Work Item Unit FY 2023-24 Fee FY 2023-24
Total Cost
FY 2024-25
Proposed Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 3 Miscellaneous Items
Gravity/Crib Wall, 0-10' high (up to 50 l.f.) up to 50 l.f. $1,577 $1,715 $1,733 156.00 9.9% Additional Gravity/Crib Wall Each 50 l.f. $971 $1,050 $1,061 90.00 9.3% Gravity/Crib Wall, over 10' high (up to 50 l.f.) up to 50 l.f. $1,821 $1,974 $1,994 173.00 9.5% Additional Gravity/Crib Wall Each 50 l.f. $1,213 $1,309 $1,322 109.00 9.0% Revisions Per hour $608 $259 $266
Commercial (New and Tenant Improvement) Each $1,094
Single Family Dwelling (New and Additions) Each $608
Remodel Each $487
Sauna—steam Each $850 $907 $916 66.00 7.8%
Siding
Stone and Brick Veneer (interior or exterior) up to 400 sf $608 $633 $639 31.00 5.1% All Other up to 400 sf $487 $503 $508 21.00 4.3%
Additional siding Each 400 sf $121 $129 $131 10.00 8.3% Signs
Directional Each $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2%
Each additional Directional Sign Each $243 $267 $269 26.00 10.7% Ground/Roof/Projecting Signs Each $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2% Master Plan Sign Check Each $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2%
Rework of any existing Ground Sign Each $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2% Other Sign Each $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2%
Reinspection Fee Each $121 $122 $124 3.00 2.5%
Wall/Awning Sign, Non-Electric Each $364 $382 $386 22.00 6.0% Wall/Awning Sign, Electric Each $364 $511 $517 153.00 42.0% Shed over 120 square feet Each $1,094
Skylight
50 sf or less (cumulative area) Each $608 $511 $517 (91.00) -15.0% Greater than 50 sf or structural Each $850 $267 $269 (581.00) -68.4% Stairs—First Flight first flight Each $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2% Each additional flight Per flightEach addl $243 $267 $269 26.00 10.7% Storage Racks
0-8' high (up to 100 l.f.) first 100 l.f. $608 $649 $655 47.00 7.7% each additional 100 l.f. Each 100 l.f. $121 $129 $131 10.00 8.3% over 8' high (up to 100 l.f.) first 100 l.f. $608 $778 $786 178.00 29.3% each additional 100 l.f. Each 100 l.f. $121 $129 $131 10.00 8.3% Stucco Applications
Base up to 400 sf $487 $503 $508 21.00 4.3%
Additional Stucco Application Each 400 sf $121 $129 $131 10.00 8.3% 1036
CC 05-14-2024
1036 of 1197
Work Item Unit FY 2023-24 Fee FY 2023-24
Total Cost
FY 2024-25
Proposed Fee YOY $ ▲ YOY % ▲
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 3 Miscellaneous Items
Swimming Pool/Spa
Vinyl-lined Each $1,094 $1,182 $1,194 100.00 9.1%
Fiberglass Each $1,094 $1,182 $1,194 100.00 9.1%
Gunite (up to 800 sf) Each $1,577 $1,699 $1,716 139.00 8.8% Additional pool (over 800 sf) Each 100 sf $364 $396 $400 36.00 9.9% Commercial pool (up to 800 sf) Each $2,672 $2,881 $2,910 238.00 8.9% Additional pool (over 800 sf) Each 100 sf $729 $792 $800 71.00 9.7% Spa or Hot Tub (Pre-fabricated) Each $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2% Technology Fee Per Permit 5.8% 5.8%
Temporary Structures Each $729 $778 $786 57.00 7.8%
Tenant Improvement Preparation Each $487 $511 $517 30.00 6.2% Window or Sliding Glass Door
Replacement (first 8 windows) first 8 $364 $374 $378 14.00 3.8% Replacement (each additional 8 windows) Each 8 $121 $129 $131 10.00 8.3% New Window (non structural) Each $305 $320 $324 19.00 6.2% New window (structural shear wall/masonry) Each $426 $454 $458 32.00 7.5% Bay Window (structural) Each $426 $454 $458 32.00 7.5%
Planning Department Review fee (New Construction and Additions) (Payable at permit submittal) Each
20% of plan
review and
inspection fees
20% of plan
review and
inspection fees
Planning Hourly Rate (Misc Reviews) Per hour Refer to
Schedule C
Refer to
Schedule C
Housing Mitigation In-lieu fees (Payable at Building Permit issuance) Per sq. ft. Refer to Schedule C
Refer to
Schedule C
Zoning, Planning, Municipal Code fees (Payable at Building Permit issuance) Per sq. ft. Refer to Schedule C
Refer to
Schedule C
Wireless Master Plan fee (Payable at Building Permit issuance) Each Refer to Schedule C
Refer to
Schedule C
Refunds - Plan Check Fees
1st review not started (within 3 Business of Submittal) 100% of Plan Review Fees 100% of Plan Review Fees Plan review more than 3 Business Days after the Date of Submittal No refund No refund Refunds - Building Permit Fees
No inspections and permit is active (not expired) 80% of permit fees 80% of permit fees No inspections and permit is expired No refund No refund Inspections were provided No refund No refund
Work without permit - based on current permit and plan check fees Double fees Double fees NOTE:
Fee Adjustments: In instances where the strict application of fees from this schedule would constitute a substantial inequity to an applicant or to the City, the Chief Building Official shall be authorized to adjust such fees on a case-by-case basis. Any such adjustments shall be recorded in writing and entered into the appropriate files.
Fees identified in this Table consist of 50% Plan Review Fee and 50% Inspection Fee 1037
CC 05-14-2024
1037 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule A - General
Fee Description Unit FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee
All Municipal Code Parking Violations (including County and State fees) Each $82.81 Animal Establishment Permit Each $369.05
Annual Lobbyist Registration Fee Per Lobbyist $296.86
Bingo Permit Annual $261.41
Business License Database Each $30.42
Candidate Statement Fee (County Regulated Fee) Each Current County Registrar Cost City Administrative Fee Each 15%
Code Enforcement
Abatement/Graffiti Cleanup Each Actual Cost *
Hourly rate Hourly $246.04
Substandard Housing Re-Inspection Each $246.04
Community Festivals - One-time Business License (correction) Each $12.88 Community Festivals - Business Partners Each $65.72
Community Festivals - Additional 10' x 10' space (includes an additional table and 2 chairs) Each $11.85 Community Festivals - Non-profit partners Each $11.85
Compilation of New Records Each Actual Cost *
Credit Card Transaction Fee Each 3.40%
CVC Parking Citation Dismissals Admin Fee (State Regulated Fee) Each $25.00 Damage to City Property
Grounds, Streets, Facilities, Traffic Engineering/Maintenance Each Actual Cost * Dangerous Dog Annual Registration Fee Annual $492.07
Sign Each $24.90
Duplicate Business Licenses Each $15.21
Event Video Taping/Editing Each Actual Cost *
False Alarms Each $121.68
Farmers Market Each $3.29
Fingerprinting Processing (State Fee $32 plus County Fee $20) Each $73.09 Flea Markets Each $13.94
Public Requests for GIS Printed Maps
Standard pre-formatted maps
Plotted maps Per Map $37.10
Printed maps Per Map $4.95
Custom request maps Per Map Actual Cost *
Prints/plots of aerial photography (see Engineering fees) Per Map Actual Cost * Handbill Permit Each $246.04
Renewals Each $123.02
Late Payment on 30 Day Delinquent City Invoices Each 12% per annum Massage Establishment Fee (Includes fingerprinting/background check and business start-up Each $553.58 Renewals (Includes two inspections per year) Each $184.53 Massage Managing Employee (Includes fingerprint/background check) Each $492.07 Renewals Each $184.53
Massage Permit Appeal (Denial/Revocation) Each $1,230.18 Municipal Code Book Per Book Vendor Invoice
New Business Monthly Reports Each $45.63
Noise Variances/Special Exceptions Each $252.38
Notary Fee (State Regulated Fee) Per Signature $15.00/signature Outside Agency Review / Services Vendor Invoice + City Admin Petitions for Reconsideration Each $376.05
Permit Update Each $123.02
Photocopies - per sheet
Standard sizes Per Page $0.30
For 11 x 17 sizes or color sheets Per Page $0.69
For Large format prints Per Page $34.36
Fair Political Practices Commission Per Page $0.10
Fair Political Practices Commission (older than five (5) years) Per Page $5.12 1038
CC 05-14-2024
1038 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule A - General
Fee Description Unit FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee
Property Liens Administrative Fee Each $246.04
Returned Check Charge
First returned check Each $25.00
Subsequent checks Each $35.00
Sign Removal (Public Right-of-Way) (All except Political Signs) Each $25.00 Sign Recovery Fee for Political Signs Each $25.00
Small Income Business License Each $92.02
Solicitor Permit (Includes fingerprinting) Each $492.07 Renewals Each $123.02
Taxi Driver Permit (Includes fingerprinting/background check) Each $984.14 Renewals Each $123.02
Tobacco Retailer (County Regulated Fee)
Application Fee Each Current County Cost
Annual Fee Annual Current County Cost
Williamson Act Filings Each $145.91
Video/Audio Service
DVD/CD Each $25.76
Flash Drive Each $27.80
* Actual cost is: 1) Fully burdened employee costs as calculated through the 2023 Cost Allocation Plan, and 2) cost of materials, contractors, and supplies.
1039
CC 05-14-2024
1039 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule B - Engineering
Unit FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee
Each $608
Each $420
Each $1,068
Each Double the permit cost
Each $2,217
Each $1,747
Each $3,551
Each/% of Project 5% of Project Costs and/or
$257 per inspection
Per Permit $528
Each $1,415
Each $1,352
Each/% of Improv. Greater of $4891 or 6% of
cost of improvement
Each $8,383
Each $13,687
Each $1,302
Per Hour $318
Per Hour $318
Each/% of Improv. Greater of $5655 or 5% of
cost of improvement
Each/% of Improv. Greater of $10729 or 5% of
cost of improvement
Each $1,589
Per Hour $190
Each *Cost of review + City
Administrative Fee
Each $636
Each $3,522
Each $2,177
Each $2,177
Each $4,216
Per Unit $6,797
Per Unit $4,215
Per s.f. $11
Per s.f. $19
Per Room $3,728
Per trip $6,862
Each $16
Each $90
Per Hour $318
FEE DESCRIPTION
Encroachment Permits
- Minor Encroachment Permits (Local Streets)
- Minor Encroachment Permits (Utility)
- Major Encroachment Permits (Arterials and Collectors) - Work without Permit
Grading permit
- <10,000 s.f. lot
- 10,000 s.f or greater
Parcel Map/Tract Map (Map Checking Fee)
- Parcel Map (1-4 lots)
- Tract Map (> 4 lots)
- Small Cell Facility Encroachment Permit
Street Cuts Miscellaneous
- Minor Street Cuts
- Major Street Cuts
- Special Major Permit (projects in excess of $30,000 or over 15 working days) Permit Extension
- Commercial
Professional Services 3rd Party Consultant Review
*Per Outside Agency Review/Services on Schedule A - General Public Works Confirmation
Annexation (plus County filing fee)
Certificates of Compliance
Plan Check and Inspection
- Stand Alone Building Permit Review
Additional Plan Review - 3 or more reviews
Revisions to Plans and Permits
Review of Public/Private Improvement Plans:
- Residential
(Includes apartments, condos, and townhomes)
- Retail
- Office
- Hotel
- Other (per PM trip)
Transportation Permit (State Regulated Fee)
- Initial Review
- Finalize Certificates
Lot Line Adjustment
Transportation Impact Fee
- Single Family
- Multi-Family
- Single
- Annual Utility Company
- Additional Engineering Investigation or Coordination
Crane Lift
Planning Application Review
VMT Monitoring Fee
1040
CC 05-14-2024
1040 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule B - Engineering
Unit FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee
Each $738
Deposit $4,571
Each No Charge
Each $3,200
Each $4,980
Each $2,597
Each $1,610
Each $1,125
Each $300
Each $1,411
Each $1,149
Each $40
Each $466
Dwelling unit $4,707
Per acre $6,389
Per acre and $4,584
Per unit $347
Per acre $12,344
Per acre $4,704
Per acre $2,375
No charge
Each $434
Each $158
Each $315
Each $2,217
Hour $291
Technology Fee Per Permit 5.8%
Special Events/Parades
Block Party
Vacation of Public Street ROW/PUE
- Summary Vacation
- Full Vacation
Rural/Semi-Rural Classification Application
FEE DESCRIPTION
Banners
- Large Banners Across Stevens Creek Boulevard
Permit Parking Study
- Application Phase
- Implementation phase
- Permit Parking Bi-annual Fee
- Application Phase
- Implementation phase
Certificate of Correction
Floodplain Evaluation/Elevation Certificate Review
Stormwater Permit Inspections - Commercial
Multiple Family greater than 5.2 dwelling units per acre *Maximum chargeable dwelling units of 20 units per acre.
Commercial and Industrial
Streamside Permit
Master Storm Drain Area Fees:
Low-Density Residential (Less than one dwelling unit per acre hillside zoning Single-Family Residential greater than one dwelling unit per acre and less than Plan Review Fee
Single Family
Multi-Family
Public Works Staff Time
Initial Inspection
Re-Inspection for Violations
Storm Management Plan Fee
Public Educational Uses
Public Facility Uses
1041
CC 05-14-2024
1041 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule B - Engineering
Density of Dwelling Units/Ac
0 - 5 $105,000/DU
5 - 10 $60,000/DU
10 - 20 $60,000/DU
20+ $54,000/DU
Senior Citizen Housing Dev. $30,000/DU
$15,000 or proportional to
the size of the main DU,
whichever is less
$513
Actual costs
PUBLIC TREE DAMAGE OR REMOVAL FEE SCHEDULE:
This fee schedule is defined in Chapter 14.12 and establishes the fee to be paid to the City for damage to and/or removal of public trees.
Repeat offenders, intentional actors and professionals, as defined in Chapter 14.12, shall be subject to the following fees:
Public Tree Damage Fee:
Public Tree Removal Fee:
FEE = UNMODIFIED TREE VALUE x SPECIES RATING x CONDITION RATING For inputs, use the following values:
UNMODIFIED TREE Refer to Unmodified Tree Value Table
SPECIES RATING Refer to Species Rating Table
CONDITION RATING Good = 1.00, Fair = 0.75, Poor = 0.50
The fee for trees less than 4 inches in diameter shall not be reduced by species or condition rating.
New Public Tree Cost Schedule:
Public Tree Planting Cost:
24" Street Tree
36" Street Tree or Larger
1st time offenders, as defined in Chapter 14.12, shall be subject to a fee of 10% of the Public Tree Damage Fee or 10% of the Public Tree Removal Fee as defined below or $600, whichever is higher, per public tree damaged and/or removed. No additional costs, such as stump removal, trimming, or replanting will apply.
$100 per cumulative diameter inch of branch or root plus, if any, the actual costs incurred for immediate corrective pruning plus, if any, the calculated costs for future corrective pruning, as may be required to maintain the health of the tree.
The fee for each tree removed shall be based upon the unmodified value of the tree removed (based upon diameter), multiplied by the species rating, multiplied by the condition rating.
Trees larger than 40” shall have the fee determined by the most recent edition of the 'Guide for Plant Appraisal', published by the Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers, using the trunk formula method.
ADU 750 SF or more**
* Park Land Dedication Fees are calculated per Municipal Code section 13.08.
On an annual basis, Public Works Department updates the fair market value of ** ADU Park Land Dedication Fee is based on the density of the property per Municipal Code section 13.08, or proportionally to the size of the main dwelling Park Land Dedication In-Lieu Fee*
1042
CC 05-14-2024
1042 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule B - Engineering
No additional costs, such as stump removal, trimming or replanting will apply.
Unmodified Tree Value Table:
Tree size (diameter of trunk)
1” to 2” $348
2” to 3” $348
3” to 4” $1,039
4” to 5” $1,039
5” to 6” $1,404
6” to 7” $1,851
7” to 8” $2,378
8” to 9” $2,987
9” to 10” $3,677
10” to 11” $4,449
11” to 12” $5,301
12” to 13” $6,235
13” to 14” $7,249
14” to 15” $8,345
15” to 16” $9,522
16” to 17” $10,780
17” to 18” $12,120
18” to 19” $13,540
19” to 20” $15,042
20” to 21” $16,625
21” to 22” $18,290
22” to 23” $20,036
23” to 24” $21,862
24” to 25” $23,769
25” to 26” $25,758
26” to 27” $27,829
27” to 28” $29,980
28” to 29” $32,212
29” to 30” $34,527
30” to 31” $36,920
31” to 32” $39,396
32” to 33” $41,954
33” to 34” $44,593
34” to 35” $47,312
35” to 36” $50,113
36” to 37” $52,995
37” to 38” $55,958
38” to 39” $59,003
39” to 40” $62,128
Measurement shall be measured 4.5 feet above the ground level and rounded down to the nearest whole inch.
If the tree is multi-trunk, use 1.5 times the diameter of the largest trunk to determine fee.
If the tree is removed to the ground, tree inventory data will be used to determine the trunk diameter.
If there is tree damage 4-5 feet above the ground, trunk diameter is to be measured 1 foot above ground level and 1 inch is to be subtracted from the diameter to determine fee.
1043
CC 05-14-2024
1043 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule B - Engineering
Common Name Species Rating%
Acacia ACACIA 60
Blackwoodacaia ACACIA MELANOXYLON 60
Trident maple ACER BUERGERIANUM 90
Big leaf maple ACER MACROPHYLLUM** 100
Japanese maple ACER PALMATUM 90
Red maple ACER REBRUM 70
Silver maple ACER SACCHARINUM 80
California buckeye AESCULUS CALIFORNICA** 100
Red hoursechesnut AESCULUS X CARNEA 90
Tree of heaven AILANTHUS ALTISSIMA 0
Silk tree ALBIZIA JULIBRISSIN 50
Black Alder ALNUS GLUTINOSA 80
Strawberry madrone ARBUTUS MARINA 90
Madrone ARBUTUS MENZIESII 100
Hong Kong orchid BAUHINIA BLAKEANA 75
Birch BETULA ALBA 60
Incense cedar CALOCEDRUS DECURRENS 80
Horsetail tree CASUARINA EQUISETIFOLIA 75
Blue atlas cedar CEDRUS ATLANTICA** 100
Deodora cedar CEDRUS DEODARA** 100
Chinese hackberry CELTUS SINENSIS 65
Carob tree CERATONIA SILIQUA 70
Redbud(eastern) CERCIS CANADENSIS 75
Camphor tree CINNAMOMUM CAMPHORA 70
Citrus CITRUS SP 40
English hawthorn CRATAEGUS LAEVIGATA 70
Cypress CUPRESSACEAE 80
Italian cypress CUPRESSUS SEMPERVIREN 80
Japanese persimmon DIOSPYROS KAKI 40
Loquat ERIOBOTRYA DEFLEXA 60
Blue gum tree EUCALYPTUS GLOBULUS 70
Eucalyptus EUCALYPTUS SP 60
Misson fig FICUS CARICA 40
Autumn purple ash FRAXINUS AMERICANA 80
Raywood ash FRAXINUS ANGUSTIFOLIA 'RAYWOOD' 80
Moraine ash FRAXINUS HOLOTRICHA 80
Shamel ash FRAXINUS UHDEI 80
Modesto ash FRAXINUS VELUTINA 'MODESTO' 80
Australian willow GEIJERA PARVIFOLIA 80
Maidenhair GINKO BILOBA 80
Honey locust GLEDITSIA TRIACANTHOS 70
Silk oak tree GREVILLEA ROBUSTA 70
English holly ILLEX AQUIFOLIUM 40
Jacaranda JACARANDA MIMMOSIFOLIA 70
Walnut JUGLANS 70
Species Rating Table
1044
CC 05-14-2024
1044 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule B - Engineering
Common Name Species Rating%
Black walnut JUGLANS HINDSII 70
Chinese flame tree KOELREUTERIA BIPINNATA 80
Muskogee crape myrtle LAGERSTROMIA 'MUSKOGEE' 80
Nanchez crape myrtle LAGERSTROMIA 'NANCHEZ' 80
Tuscarora crape myrtle LAGERSTROMIA 'TUSCARORA' 80
Sweet bay LAURUS NOBILIS 80
Japanese privit LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM 30
American sweetgum LIQUIDAMBER STYRACIFLUA 40
Tulip tree LIRIODENDRON 60
Brisbane box tree LOPHOSTEMON CONFERTUS 90
Magnolia MAGNOLIA GRANDIFOLIA RUSSET 75
Magnolia (dwarf) MAGNOLIA GRANDIFOLIA ST MARY 75
Saucer magnolia MAGNOLIA SOLINGIANA 75
Crabapple tree MALUS FLORIBUNDA 90
Apple MALUS SP 40
Mayten tree MAYTENUS 70
Malaleuca(broad leaf) MELALEUCA LEUCADENDRA 60
Malaleuca(narrow leaf) MELALEUCA LINARIFOLIA 60
Dawn redwood METASAQUOIA GLYPTOSTROBOIDES 100
Fruitless mulberry MORUS ALBA 40
Black mulberry MORUS NIGRA 40
Myoprum MYOPORUM LAETUM 70
Oleander tree NERIUM OLEANDER 40
Olive OLEA EUROPAEA 70
Devilwood OSMANTHUS AMERICANUS 0
Palm PALM* 40
Avocado PERSEA AMERICANA 60
Red leaf photinia PHOTINIA GLABRA 60
Spruce PICEA 80
Colorado spruce PICEA PUNGENS 80
Colorado blue spruce PICEA PUNGENS 'GLAUCA' 80
Italian stone pine PINUS PINEA 90
Pine PINUS SP 30
Chinese pistacio PISTACIA CHINENSIS 80
Lemonwood tree PITTOSPORUM EUGENIOIDES 40
Japanese cheesewood PITTOSPORUM TOBIRA 40
London plane 'colombiana' PLATANUS COLUMBIANA 95
Western Sycamore PLATANUS RACEMOSA** 100
London plane 'bloodgood' PLATANUS X HISPANICA 'BLOODGOOD' 95 Yew pine PODOCURPUS MACROPHYLLUS 75
Poplar POPULUS 60
Flowering cherry PRUNUS AKEBONO 80
Wild Plum PRUNUS AMARACANA 40
Almond tree PRUNUS ALMOND 50
Apricot tree PRUNUS APRICOT 40
Species Rating Table
1045
CC 05-14-2024
1045 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule B - Engineering
Common Name Species Rating%
Fruiting cherry PRUNUS AVIUM 0
Carolina cherry PRUNUS CAROLINIANA 60
Purple leaf plum PRUNUS CERASFERA KRAUTER VESUVIUS 70
Peach tree PRUNUS PERSICA 40
Douglas fir PSEUDOTSUGA MENZIESII 80
Guava PSIDIUM GUAJAVA 40
Pomegranate PUNICA GRANATUM 40
Aristocrat Flowering pear tree PYRUS CALLERYANA 'ARISTOCRAT' 75 Bradford flowering pear PYRUS CALLERYANA 'BRADFORD' 75
Chanticleer flowering pear PYRUS CALLERYANA 'CHANTICLEER' 75 Evergreen flowering pear PYRUS KAWAKAMII 75
Asian pear PYRUS PYRIFOLIA 40
Oak QUERCUS 90
Coast live oak QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA** 100
White oak QUERCUS ALBA 90
Texas red oak QUERCUS BUCKEYI 90
Sierra oak QUERCUS CAMBII 90
Blue oak QUERCUS DOUGLASII** 100
Forest green oak QUERCUS FRAINETTO 90
Holly oak QUERCUS ILEX 90
Black oak QUERCUS KELLOGGII** 100
Valley oak QUERCUS LOBATA** 100
Red oak QUERCUS SUBER 90
Cork oak QUERCUS SUBER 90
Southern live oak QUERCUS VIRGINIANA 100
Interior live oak QUERCUS WISLIZENI** 100
African sumac RHUS LANCIA 70
Weeping willow SALIX BABYLONICA 40
Wild willow SALIX SCOULERIANA 0
California pepper tree SCHINUS MOLE 40
Brazilian pepper tree SCHINUS TEREBINTHEFOLIUS 40
Coast redwood SEQUIOA SEMPRIVIRONS 95
Giant sequioa SEQUOIADENDRON GIGANTEUM 80
Japanese pogoda SOPHORIA JAPONICA 70
Chinese tallow TRIADICA SEBIFERA 50
Water gum TRISTANIA LAURINA 70
Bosque chinese elm ULMAS PARVIFOLIA 'BOSQUE' 90
Chinese elm ULMUS PARVIFOLIA 70
Siberian elm ULMUS PUMILA 60
Bay laurel UMBELLULARIA CALIFORNICA** 100
Mexican fan palm WASHINGTON ROBUSTA 0
Spanish dagger yucca YUCCA GLORIOSA 0
Zelkova ZELKOVA SERRATA 65
*All palms on Palm Avenue are protected heritage trees and will be rated @ 100% **Protected tree species
Species Rating Table
1046
CC 05-14-2024
1046 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule C - Planning
DEFINITIONS
A. Parcel Map: Subdivisions, including ministerial subdivisions - up to four (4) parcels (CMC Chapter 18.20).
B. Tentative map: Subdivisions - five (5) or more parcels (CMC Chapter 18.16).
P. Legal Noticing Fee: Assessed for all permit applications that require noticing (CMC Chapter 19.12).
J. Project Review Meeting: Request for a one hour meeting by an applicant to review a project with City staff without any written feedback.
H. Minor Modification: An application that is administratively reviewed by staff either at an advertised public hearing/meeting or in a non-hearing process (CMC Chapter 19.164).
I. Exceptions: An exception to the zoning standards for which an exception process and findings are identified in the Municipal Code. These include Fence, Sign, Height, Hillside, Parking, R-1, A, A-1, and R1 cluster zone exceptions. This also includes exceptions identified in the City's Specific Plans (CMC Chapter 19.12 and Title 20).
C. Minor: for ten thousand square feet or less of commercial and/or industrial and/or office and/or other non-residential use, or six or fewer residential units (CMC Chapter 19.12)
D. Major: for more than ten thousand square feet of commercial and/or industrial and/or office and/or other non-residential use, or greater than six residential units (CMC Chapter 19.12).
E. Minor Architectural and Site Approval - Duplex/Residential: Architectural approval of single family homes in a planned development zoning district, redevelopment or modification of duplexes, and associated landscaping, where such review is required (CMC Chapter 19.12).
G. Major Architectural and Site Approval: Architectural approval of all other development projects (CMC Chapter 19.12).
F. Minor Architectural and Site Approval: Architectural approval of the following: minor building modifications, landscaping, signs and lighting for new development, redevelopment or modification in such zones where such review is required (CMC Chapter 19.12).
K. Preliminary Review: One round of informal review of any proposed project with written feedback from City staff.
M. Sign Permit: For signs that require a public meeting such as freeway oriented signage, electronic readerboard signs etc. (CMC Chapter 19.104)
L. Temporary Sign Permit: A review of a temporary sign application for banners, A-frame signs and other temporary signs (CMC Chapter 19.104).
N. Extension Permit: A one-time one-year extension of the planning permit expiration date (CMC Chapter 19.12).
O. Appeal: A request from the project applicant or interested party to reverse or amend a decision made by the approval authority. Fee Exemption for: an appointed public official serving on the board that made the decision subject to the appeal, an appointed public official serving on a board that is directly affected by the decision and City Council members. At the conclusion of a City Council appeal hearing, it may choose to, at its sole discretion, refund all, a portion of, or none of the appeal fee (CMC Chapter 19.12).
1047
CC 05-14-2024
1047 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule C - Planning
Fee Description1 Unit FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee
Planning Staff Hourly Rate2 Per Hour $290
General Plan
Authorization Deposit Staff Hourly Rate
Amendment Deposit Staff Hourly Rate
Zoning
Zoning Map Amendment Deposit Staff Hourly Rate
Zoning Text Amendment Deposit Staff Hourly Rate
Single-Story Overlay District Deposit Staff Hourly Rate Study Session Deposit Staff Hourly Rate
Subdivision
Parcel Map (See Definition A) Each $27,393
Tentative Map (See Definition B) Each $47,078
Conditional Use/Development Permit
Temporary Use Permit Each $5,081
Administrative Conditional Use Permit Each $10,722
Minor (See Definition C) Each $25,755
Major (See Definition D) Each $39,301
Amendment to Conditional Use/Development Permit
Minor (See Definition C) Each $11,618
Major (See Definition D) Each $25,071
Architectural and Site Approval Permit
Minor Duplex / Residential (See Definition E) Each $10,692 Minor (See Definition F) Each $16,683
Major (See Definition G) Each $25,451
Single Family (R-1) Residential Permits
Minor Residential Permit Each $4,024
Two-Story Permit without Design Review Each $5,035
Two-Story Permit with Design Review Each $6,149
Director Minor Modification (See Definition H) Each $5,497 Ministerial Residential Permit
Miscellaneous Ministerial Permit Each $4,551
Exceptions (See Definition I)
Fence Exception - R1 & R2 Each $4,673
Fence Exception - Other Each $5,184
Sign Exception Each $6,981
R-1 Exception Each $7,821
Heart of the City Exception Each $25,126
Hillside Exception Each $23,965
Note: Mixed use applications will be classified based upon the highest intensity and review process. The Director of Community Development will have discretion to classify projects based upon the above criteria.
Q. Special Events Permit: A request to host a special event for no more than a total of 12 calendar days in a year including, but not limited to, employee holiday party, summer barbeque, any outdoor event where normal operations occur indoors, car sales/show event, events located in parking lots where such uses are not authorized ordinarily. Large events involve an entire shopping center, office or industrial buildings/sites, and other commercial sites. Small events typically involve individual businesses/tenants in a shopping center or building. Staff reserves the right to determine the applicable event type based on the project description provided. Churches/non-profits operating on property in their control are exempt from fees.
R. Housing Mitigation Fee: A fee assessed in accordance with the City's General Plan Housing Element, Municipal Code (CMC 19.172) and the City's BMR Housing Mitigation Program Procedural Manual. 1048
CC 05-14-2024
1048 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule C - Planning
Fee Description Unit FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee
Exception - Other Each $7,942
Variance Each $9,081
Reasonable Accommodation Each $1,803
Project Review Meeting (See Definition J) Per Review $2,504 Preliminary Application Review (See Definition K)
Single Family Per Review $2,534
Non-Residential (Retail/Industrial/Office/Hotel)
<10,000 sf Per Review $5,491
>10,000 sf Per Review $9,550
Residential / Mixed Use:
Duplex Per Review $1,991
3-6 Units Per Review $8,777
6-50 Units Per Review $13,549
>50 Units Per Review $19,556
Tree Removal Permit
Tree Removal Permit (no Arborist review required)
First Tree Per Tree $424
Each Additional Tree Per Tree $167
Tree Removal Permit (Arborist review required)
First Tree Per Tree $776
Each Additional Tree Per Tree $250
Retroactive Tree Removal Per Tree $5,520
Heritage Tree Designation Each $422
Tree Management Plan Each $7,951
Signs
Temporary Sign Permit (See Definition L) Each $553
Sign Permit (See Definition M) Each $7,532
Sign Program Each $4,456
Planning Commission Interpretation Each $8,054
Extension of Approved Entitlements (See Definition N) Each $2,103 Environmental Assessment
Environmental Impact Report (Plus State & County Filing Fees) Each Contract+Admin Fee Negative Declaration - Major (Plus State & County Filing Fees) Each Contract+Admin Fee Negative Declaration - Minor (Plus State & County Filing Fees) Each Contract+Admin Fee Categorical Exemption (Plus County Filing Fee) Each $401 Appeals (See Definition O)
Planning Commission Each $505
City Council Each $505
Miscellaneous Fees
Legal Noticing Fee (See Definition P) Each $527
Mercury News Ad Actual Cost + Admin Fee
Zoning Verification Letter Each $583
Public Convenience and Necessity Letter (Alcoholic Beverage License) Each $291 Short-Term Rental Each $409
Mobile Vending Registration Fee Each $548
Special Events (See Definition Q)
Large Event Each $4,886
Small Event Each $500
Planning Inspection Per Inspection $430
Technology Fee Per Permit 5.80%
1049
CC 05-14-2024
1049 of 1197
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule C - Planning
Fee Description Unit FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee
Fees Assessed with Building Permits
Wireless Master Plan Fees (at Building Permit Issuance) Equipment Mounted on Existing Light/Utility Pole Each $10.28 New Personal Wireless Facility (not mounted on light/utility pole) Each $2,241 Zoning, Planning, Municipal Code Fees (at Building Permit Issuance) All Non-Residential and Multi-Family Per s.f. $1.52
Residential Single Family Per s.f. $1.52
General Plan Office Allocation Fee Per s.f. $1.52
Planning Department Review fee (New Construction and Additions) (Payable at permit submittal) Each 20% of Plan Check and Inspection fees FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY: 2
Housing Mitigation In-Lieu Fees 2 (See Definition R)
Residential - Ownership
Detached Single Family Residence Per s.f. $21.87
Small Lot Single Family Residence or Townhome Per s.f. $24.05 Multi-family Attached Townhome, Apartment, or Condominium (up to 35 du/ac) Per s.f. $29.15
Multi-family Attached Townhome, Apartment, or Condominium (over 35 du/ac) Per s.f. $29.15
Residential - Rental
Multi-family Attached Townhome, Apartment, or Condominium (up to 35 du/ac) Per s.f. $29.15
Multi-family Attached Townhome, Apartment, or Condominium (over 35 du/ac) Per s.f. $36.44
Non-Residential
Office, Research and Development, or Industrial Per s.f. $34.55 Hotel Per s.f. $17.28
Self-storage, employee unit provided Per s.f. $0.65
Self-storage, employee unit not provided Per s.f. $1.36 Warehouse Per s.f. $48.00
Commercial/Retail Per s.f. $14.58
1 All application fees except those projects subject to the Planning Staff Hourly Rate fee (see note 2) allow for two rounds of review. Any submissions beyond two shall be subject to a fee equal to 50% of the total permit fees paid initially. 2 Applications may be subject to a Planning Staff Hourly Rate fee for applicable staff time, and vendor invoice. These fees apply to projects that require a level of staff support greater than the scope of work included in the regular fee schedule and will be based on the time and materials required to process the entire project. The applicant will be notified if these fees are applicable to their project. The applicant will be required to enter into a Reimbursement Agreement with the City for such projects. 3 All Housing Mitigation Fees are assessed in accordance with the BMR Housing Mitigation Manual. Non-residential Housing Mitigation In-lieu Fees are based on the 2015 and the 2020 Supplement to the Non-Residential Nexus Analysis by Keyser Marsten. Residential Housing Mitigation In-lieu Fees are based on the 2015 Nexus Study. These fees increase automatically annually (on July 1 of each year) by the Consumer Price Index of All Urban Consumers for San Francisco, CA.
An administrative fee (15%) will be charged for outside agency review/consultant services/outside services (ads etc.) per Schedule A - General Fees.
If plans are submitted on paper, these must be sent to an outside agency for scanning. The cost of scanning the plans, plus the administrative fee per Schedule A - General Fees will be charged.
1050
CC 05-14-2024
1050 of 1197
City of Cupertino, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fee Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 1 Plan Check and Inspection Fees
Related IBC
Class
Building Use
(e.g., IBC Occupancy Type) Sq. Ft. Permit Tech Cost
Plan Check
Cost
Inspection
Cost
Plan Check
Cost Inspection Cost
A Assembly 250 $117 $4,162 $3,918 $110.97 $116.14
1,250 $233 $5,271 $4,962 $110.97 $125.36
2,500 $233 $6,658 $6,529 $88.78 $4.67
5,000 $350 $8,878 $6,529 $22.19 $34.82
12,500 $350 $10,542 $9,141 $19.98 $30.18
25,000 $467 $13,039 $12,797 $52.16 $53.06
A A Occupancy Tenant Improvements 500 $233 $3,329 $3,918 $41.62 $76.96 2,500 $467 $4,162 $5,223 $44.39 $73.13
5,000 $467 $5,271 $7,052 $38.84 $4.67
10,000 $700 $7,213 $7,052 $7.40 $19.15
25,000 $700 $8,323 $9,924 $7.77 $16.60
50,000 $934 $10,265 $13,842 $20.53 $29.55
B Business 1,000 $233 $5,271 $5,746 $34.68 $51.54
5,000 $467 $6,658 $7,574 $38.84 $47.01
10,000 $467 $8,600 $9,924 $30.52 $25.84
20,000 $700 $11,652 $12,275 $6.47 $6.09
50,000 $700 $13,594 $14,103 $6.66 $11.44
100,000 $934 $16,923 $19,588 $16.92 $20.52
B B Occupancy Tenant Improvements 300 $117 $4,162 $3,134 $92.48 $118.55 1,500 $233 $5,271 $4,440 $92.48 $69.65
3,000 $233 $6,658 $5,485 $83.23 $3.89
6,000 $350 $9,155 $5,485 $15.41 $26.12
15,000 $350 $10,542 $7,835 $16.65 $19.93
30,000 $467 $13,039 $10,708 $43.46 $37.25
E Educational 100 $117 $4,162 $3,134 $277.43 $290.35
500 $233 $5,271 $4,179 $277.43 $313.40
1,000 $233 $6,658 $5,746 $249.69 $11.67
2,000 $350 $9,155 $5,746 $46.24 $78.35
5,000 $350 $10,542 $8,096 $49.94 $65.02
10,000 $467 $13,039 $11,230 $130.39 $116.97
E E Occupancy Tenant Improvements 100 $117 $3,052 $3,134 $208.08 $225.05 500 $233 $3,884 $3,918 $221.95 $261.17
1,000 $233 $4,994 $5,223 $166.46 $11.67
2,000 $350 $6,658 $5,223 $36.99 $69.65
5,000 $350 $7,768 $7,313 $38.84 $59.79
10,000 $467 $9,710 $10,186 $97.10 $106.52
F Factory Industrial 1,000 $233 $5,826 $6,007 $20.81 $45.01 5,000 $467 $6,658 $7,574 $33.29 $47.01
10,000 $467 $8,323 $9,924 $36.07 $25.84
20,000 $700 $11,930 $12,275 $5.55 $6.09
50,000 $700 $13,594 $14,103 $3.33 $11.44
100,000 $934 $15,259 $19,588 $15.26 $20.52
F F Occupancy Tenant Improvements 1,000 $233 $4,716 $4,701 $27.74 $45.01 5,000 $467 $5,826 $6,268 $33.29 $41.79
10,000 $467 $7,491 $8,357 $27.74 $2.33
20,000 $700 $10,265 $8,357 $5.55 $11.32
50,000 $700 $11,930 $11,753 $5.55 $9.87
100,000 $934 $14,704 $16,454 $14.70 $17.39
H High Hazard 100 $117 $5,826 $4,179 $346.79 $355.64
500 $233 $7,213 $5,485 $443.89 $313.40
1,000 $233 $9,433 $7,052 $332.92 $11.67
2,000 $350 $12,762 $7,052 $73.98 $95.76
5,000 $350 $14,981 $9,924 $72.13 $80.69
10,000 $467 $18,588 $13,842 $185.88 $143.09
H H Occupancy Tenant Improvements 100 $117 $3,329 $3,134 $208.08 $290.35 500 $233 $4,162 $4,179 $277.43 $313.40
1,000 $233 $5,549 $5,746 $194.20 $11.67
2,000 $350 $7,491 $5,746 $46.24 $78.35
5,000 $350 $8,878 $8,096 $38.84 $65.02
10,000 $467 $10,820 $11,230 $108.20 $116.97
I Institutional 500 $233 $6,658 $4,440 $83.23 $90.02
2,500 $467 $8,323 $6,007 $99.88 $73.13
5,000 $467 $10,820 $7,835 $77.68 $4.67
10,000 $700 $14,704 $7,835 $16.65 $22.63
25,000 $700 $17,201 $11,230 $16.65 $17.65
50,000 $934 $21,362 $15,409 $42.72 $32.69
I I Occupancy Tenant Improvements 100 $117 $4,162 $3,134 $277.43 $290.35 500 $233 $5,271 $4,179 $277.43 $261.17
1,000 $233 $6,658 $5,485 $249.69 $11.67
Base Cost1 Cost for each Add. 100 Sq. Ft.1,2
1051
CC 05-14-2024
1051 of 1197
City of Cupertino, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fee Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 1 Plan Check and Inspection Fees
2,000 $350 $9,155 $5,485 $46.24 $78.35
5,000 $350 $10,542 $7,835 $49.94 $59.79
10,000 $467 $13,039 $10,708 $130.39 $111.75
M Mercantile 2,000 $350 $7,768 $6,529 $27.74 $27.23
10,000 $700 $9,988 $8,357 $27.74 $28.73
20,000 $700 $12,762 $11,230 $22.19 $1.75
40,000 $1,050 $17,201 $11,230 $5.09 $7.84
100,000 $1,050 $20,253 $15,931 $4.99 $6.62
200,000 $1,400 $25,246 $22,200 $12.62 $11.80
M M Occupancy Tenant Improvements 300 $233 $3,329 $3,656 $69.36 $128.27 1,500 $467 $4,162 $4,962 $92.48 $104.47
3,000 $467 $5,549 $6,529 $64.73 $7.78
6,000 $700 $7,491 $6,529 $15.41 $31.92
15,000 $700 $8,878 $9,402 $12.95 $24.19
30,000 $934 $10,820 $12,797 $36.07 $45.77
R-1 Residential—Hotels & Motels 3,000 $350 $9,155 $7,574 $20.81 $22.51 15,000 $700 $11,652 $9,924 $22.19 $20.89
30,000 $700 $14,981 $13,059 $17.57 $1.17
60,000 $1,050 $20,253 $13,059 $3.70 $6.09
150,000 $1,050 $23,582 $18,543 $3.88 $5.11
300,000 $1,400 $29,408 $25,856 $9.80 $9.09
R-2 Residential—Apartment Building 800 $233 $7,213 $6,007 $60.69 $64.43 4,000 $467 $9,155 $7,835 $69.36 $58.76
8,000 $467 $11,930 $10,186 $52.02 $2.92
16,000 $700 $16,091 $10,186 $11.56 $17.41
40,000 $700 $18,865 $14,364 $11.79 $14.95
80,000 $934 $23,582 $20,110 $29.48 $26.30
R-2 Residential—Apartment Building 800 $233 $277 $6,007 $0.00 $64.43 - Repeat Unit 4,000 $467 $277 $7,835 $0.00 $58.76
8,000 $467 $277 $10,186 $0.00 $2.92
16,000 $700 $277 $10,186 $1.16 $17.41
40,000 $700 $555 $14,364 $0.00 $14.95
80,000 $934 $555 $20,110 $0.69 $26.30
R-3 Dwellings—Custom Homes, Models, 1,000 $233 $5,271 $6,268 $18.50 $52.23 First Master Plan 2,500 $233 $5,549 $7,052 $73.98 $52.23 4,000 $233 $6,658 $7,835 $13.87 $76.96
6,000 $467 $6,936 $9,141 $55.49 $26.12
8,000 $467 $8,046 $9,663 $13.87 $76.96
10,000 $700 $8,323 $10,969 $83.23 $116.69
R-3 Dwellings—Production Phase 1,000 $117 $555 $4,440 $0.00 $112.25 of Master Plan (Repeats) 2,500 $233 $555 $6,007 $18.50 $121.88 4,000 $233 $832 $7,835 $13.87 $11.67
6,000 $467 $1,110 $7,835 $13.87 $169.76
8,000 $467 $1,387 $11,230 $13.87 $220.61
10,000 $700 $1,665 $15,409 $16.65 $161.09
R-3 Group Care 1,000 $233 $6,104 $6,007 $41.62 $58.07
5,000 $467 $7,768 $8,096 $44.39 $47.01
10,000 $467 $9,988 $10,447 $36.07 $2.33
20,000 $700 $13,594 $10,447 $7.40 $14.80
50,000 $700 $15,814 $14,887 $7.77 $11.96
100,000 $934 $19,698 $20,632 $19.70 $21.57
R R Occupancy Tenant Improvements 80 $233 $2,497 $3,395 $173.40 $326.46 400 $233 $3,052 $4,440 $208.08 $326.46
800 $233 $3,884 $5,746 $173.40 $29.18
1,600 $467 $5,271 $5,746 $34.68 $108.82
4,000 $467 $6,104 $8,357 $41.62 $77.66
8,000 $700 $7,768 $11,230 $97.10 $149.13
S Storage 600 $233 $4,716 $4,179 $57.80 $64.14
3,000 $467 $6,104 $5,485 $55.49 $60.94
6,000 $467 $7,768 $7,313 $46.24 $3.89
12,000 $700 $10,542 $7,313 $9.25 $17.41
30,000 $700 $12,207 $10,447 $10.17 $13.84
60,000 $934 $15,259 $14,364 $25.43 $25.50
S S Occupancy Tenant Improvements 600 $233 $3,884 $3,918 $46.24 $64.14 3,000 $467 $4,994 $5,223 $46.24 $60.94
6,000 $467 $6,381 $7,052 $36.99 $3.89
12,000 $700 $8,600 $7,052 $7.71 $15.96
30,000 $700 $9,988 $9,924 $8.32 $13.84
60,000 $934 $12,485 $13,842 $20.81 $24.63
U Accessory 40
200
400
1052
CC 05-14-2024
1052 of 1197
City of Cupertino, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fee Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 1 Plan Check and Inspection Fees
800
1,000 $233 $2,219 $3,656 $27.74 $168.37
2,000 $350 $2,497 $5,223 $41.62 $110.30
4,000 $467 $3,329 $7,313 $83.23 $194.49
Standard Comm. Foundation 500 $233 $2,774 $3,918 $27.74 $76.96 w/o Podium 2,500 $467 $3,329 $5,223 $44.39 $62.68
5,000 $467 $4,439 $6,790 $33.29 $4.67
10,000 $700 $6,104 $6,790 $5.55 $19.15
25,000 $700 $6,936 $9,663 $6.66 $15.56
50,000 $934 $8,600 $13,320 $17.20 $28.51
Standard Comm. Foundation 500 $233 $3,052 $4,179 $41.62 $76.96 with Podium 2,500 $467 $3,884 $5,485 $44.39 $73.13
5,000 $467 $4,994 $7,313 $33.29 $4.67
10,000 $700 $6,658 $7,313 $7.40 $20.89
25,000 $700 $7,768 $10,447 $7.77 $16.60
50,000 $934 $9,710 $14,364 $19.42 $30.60
All Shell Buildings 500 $233 $3,329 $3,656 $41.62 $76.96 2,500 $467 $4,162 $4,962 $55.49 $62.68
5,000 $467 $5,549 $6,529 $38.84 $4.67
10,000 $700 $7,491 $6,529 $9.25 $19.15
25,000 $700 $8,878 $9,402 $7.77 $14.51
50,000 $934 $10,820 $12,797 $21.64 $27.46 1
At Building Permit submittal, a Planning Division Review fee of 20% shall be collected (see Table 3 - Misc. Items) 2 Each additional 100 square feet, or portion thereof, up to the next highest project size threshold. 1053
CC 05-14-2024
1053 of 1197
FEE DESCRIPTION Unit FY 2024-25
Proposed Fee
MECHANICAL FEES
Mechanical Permit Fee Each $266
Stand Alone Mechanical Plan Check (hourly rate) Each $266 Other Mechanical Inspections (hourly rate) Each $266
MECHANICAL UNIT FEES:
Install or relocate HVAC system or portion there of
Residential Each $261
Commercial Each $392
Hood installation that is served by mechanical exhaust, including the ducts for such hood
Residential Each $131
Commercial Each $522
Any other piece of equipment or appliance not listed in Mechanical schedule. Each $261 Electrical Permit Fee Each $266
Electrical Plan Check Each $266
Electrical Inspections Each $266
ELECTRICAL UNIT FEES:
Residential Whole-House Rewire (up to 2500 sq ft) Each $522 Each Additional 1000 sq ft Each 1,000 sf $261
Receptacle, switch, lighting, or other outlets at which current is used or controlled, except services, feeders, and meters
First 20 First 20 $87
Each Additional Each $9
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 2 Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing Fees
ELECTRICAL FEES
1054
CC 05-14-2024
1054 of 1197
FEE DESCRIPTION Unit FY 2024-25
Proposed Fee
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 2 Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing Fees Lighting fixtures, sockets, or other lamp-holding devices First 20 First 20 $131
Each Additional Each $9
Pole or platform-mounted lighting fixtures Each $30
Appliances (Install / Repair / Replace)
Residential Each $44
Commercial Each $86
Power Apparatus - Generator/Transformer or Similar (Install/Repair/Replace) Residential Each $261
Commercial Each $392
Services (including Temporary Power)
600 volts or less, up to 200 amperes in rating Each $87 600 volts or less, 201 to 1000 amperes in rating Each $261 Over 600 volts or over 1000 amperes in rating Each $392 Any other Electrical apparatus, conduits, and conductors not listed in Electrical Schedule. Each $261
PLUMBING/GAS FEES
Plumbing/Gas Permit Fee Each $266
Stand Alone Plumbing Plan Check Each $266
Other Plumbing and Gas Inspections Each $266
PLUMBING/GAS UNIT FEES:
Residential Whole-House Re-Plumbing (up to 2500 sq ft) Each $522 Each Additional 1000 sq ft Each 1,000 sf $261
Building sewer lateral (Install / Repair / Replace)
Residential Each $65
Commercial Each $131
Sewer Clean-out (Install/Repair/Replace)
Residential Each $65
Commercial Each $131
Building Drain/Waste/Vent Repair
Residential Each $18
Commercial Each $26
Water Heater Replacement / Installation - All Types
1055
CC 05-14-2024
1055 of 1197
FEE DESCRIPTION Unit FY 2024-25
Proposed Fee
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 2 Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing Fees Residential Each $65
Commercial Each $196
Interceptors - Grease/Sand (Install/Repair/Replace) Each $196 Water Treatment System (Install/Repair/Replace) Each $87 Gas piping (Install/Repair/Replace) Each 4 $131
Install or Replace Water Meter / Service Each $65
Partial Water Re-pipe
Residential Per fixture $26
Commercial Per fixture $17
Any other device/fixture not listed in Plumbing Schedule (Install/Repair/Replace) Each $131 1056
CC 05-14-2024
1056 of 1197
Work Item
Unit FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee
Standard Hourly Rate - Building Per hour $266
Accessibility Hardship Exemption Each $277
Acoustical Review
Single Family Home/Duplex—New Each $655
Single Family Home/Duplex—Addition/Alteration Each $386 Multi-Family/Commercial Each $655
Additions (Non Hillside R3 Occupancy) - Plan Check Fees Plan Check Fees (up to 250 sq. ft.) Each $1,159
Plan Check Fees (251 - 499 sq. ft.) Each $2,236
Plan Check Fees (500-999 sq. ft.) Each $2,767
Additions (Non Hillside R3 Occupancy) - Inspection Fees Inspection Fees (up to 250 sq. ft.) Each $1,874
Inspection Fees (251 - 499 sq. ft.) Each $2,392
Inspection Fees (500-999 sq. ft.) Each $2,990
Accessory Buildings - Residential
Accessory Buildings (Up to 499 sq. ft.) Each $1,716
Accessory Buildings (500 - 999 sq. ft.) Each $2,516
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) - Plan Check Fees
Plan Check Fees (up to 499 sq. ft.) Each $2,453
Plan Check Fees (500 - 999 sq. ft.) Each $3,563
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) - Inspection Fees
Inspection Fees (up to 499 sq. ft.) Each $2,612
Inspection Fees (500 - 999 sq. ft.) Each $3,656
Address Assignment Per hour $233
Board of Appeals Per hour $266
Clerical Fee 1/2 hour $117
Alternate Materials and Methods of Construction Per hour $255 Antenna—Telecom Facility
Radio Each $458
Cellular/Mobile Phone, alterations to existing facility Each $655 Cellular/Mobile Phone, free-standing Each $2,271
Cellular/Mobile Phone, attached to building Each $1,194 Arbor/Trellis Each $655
Awning/Canopy (supported by building) Each $655
Balcony Addition Each $1,588
Battery Energy Storage System up to three (3) $655
Each Additional Each $386
Below Market Rate
Escrow Inspection % of Sale Price 0.52%
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 3 Miscellaneous Items
1057
CC 05-14-2024
1057 of 1197
Work Item
Unit FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 3 Miscellaneous Items
Carport Each $916
Certifications
Special Inspector Qualifications (initial review) Each $511 Special Inspector Qualifications (renewal / update) Each $233 Chimney (new) Each $916
Chimney Repair Each $517
Commercial Coach (per unit) Each $1,194
Covered Porch Each $916
Deck (wood) Each $916
Deck Railing Each $517
Deferred Submittal (2 hour minimum) Each $266
Demolition
Multi-Family and Commercial (up to 3,000 sf) Base $772
Multi-Family and Commercial (each additional 3,000 sf) Each 3,000 sf $269 Residential (R-3 Occ) (up to 3,000 sf) Base $772
Residential (R-3 Occ) (each additional 3,000 sf) Each 3,000 sf $269 Swimming Pool Residential Each $517
Swimming Pool Multi-Family and Commercial (up to 3,000 sf) Base $778 Swimming Pool Multi-Family and Commercial (each additional 3,000 sf) Each 3,000 sf $261 Disabled Access Compliance Inspection Per hour $266
Door
New door (non structural) Each $386
New door (structural shear wall/masonry) Each $655
Duplicate / Replacement Job Card Each $117
Electric Vehicle Charging Station Each $266
Extensions
Plan Check Applications (within 180 days of Submittal) 1 hour $266 Permits (within 180 days of Issuance)
Start construction, without plans 1/2 hour $139
Resume or complete construction, without plans 1/2 hour $139 Start construction, with plans 1 hour $277
Resume or complete construction, with plans 2 hours $555 Fence
Non-masonry, over 7 feet in height Up to 100 l.f. $517
Non-masonry, each additional 100 l.f. Each 100 l.f. $131 Masonry, over 7 feet in height Up to 100 l.f. $916
Masonry, each additional 100 l.f. Each 100 l.f. $522
Fireplace
Masonry each $916
Pre-Fabricated/Metal each $517
1058
CC 05-14-2024
1058 of 1197
Work Item
Unit FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 3 Miscellaneous Items
Flag pole (over 20 feet in height) each $517
Foundation Repair each $1,178
Inspections
Pre-Inspection Fee Per hour $266
Standard Inspection Hourly Rate Per hour $266
Progress Inspection Per hour $266
Partial Inspection Per hour $266
Courtesy Inspection - 2 hour minimum Per hour $266
Cancelled inspection w/out advance notice Per hour $266 Reinspection Per hour $266
Outside of normal business hours (2 hour minimum) Per hour $308 Inspection Supplemental Fee (Projects that require more inspections than average, the Building Official may charge additional inspection fees) First 1/2 hour minimum First 1/2 hour $131
Each Additional hour Per hour $261
Lighting pole Each $655
each additional pole Each $269
Modular Structures Each $933
Modification of Technical Code 1 hour $266
Occupancy
Certificate of Occupancy/Completion Each $517
Temporary Occupancy Permit Per six months $517
Partition—Commercial, Interior (up to 30 l.f.) Up to 30 l.f. $786 Additional partition Each 30 l.f. $261
Partition—Residential, Interior (up to 30 l.f.) Up to 30 l.f. $517 Additional partition Each 30 l.f. $261
Patio Cover / Gazebo
Wood frame Up to 300 sf $933
Metal frame Up to 300 sf $933
Other frame Up to 300 sf $933
Additional patio Each 300 sf $400
Enclosed prefabricated Sun Room Up to 300 sf $916
Photovoltaic System
Residential
Systems up to 15kW Each $450
Each Additional kW Above 15kW Each Addl kW $15
Multi-Family and Commercial:
Systems up to 50kW up to 8 kW Each $1,000
Multi-Family Res/Commercial, each additional 1 kilowatt Each 1 addl kW $7 Each Additional kW Above 250kW Each addl kW $5
1059
CC 05-14-2024
1059 of 1197
Work Item
Unit FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 3 Miscellaneous Items
Thermal System
Residential:
Systems up to 10kW Each $450
Each Additional kW Above 10kW Each addl kW $15
Multi-Family and Commercial:
Systems up to 30kW Each $1,000
Each Additional kW between 30kW and 260kW Each addl kW $7 Each Additional kW Above 260kW Each addl kW $5
Pile Foundation
Cast in Place Concrete (first 10 piles) Up to 10 $1,194 Additional Piles (increments of 10) Each 10 $800
Driven (steel, pre-stressed concrete) Up to 10 $1,194
Additional Piles (increments of 10) Each 10 $800
Product Review Per hour $255
Plan Review
Standard Plan Review Hourly Rate Per hour $277
Overtime Plan Review (2 hour minimum) Per hour $325
Pre-Submittal Plan Review (2 hour minimum) Per hour $277 Expedited Plan Review Each 1.5x Plan Check Fee
Plan Review Supplemental Fee (after 2nd review)
First 1/2 hour minimum First 1/2 hour $278
Pre-Construction Meeting each $450
Remodel—Residential
Kitchen (up to 300 sq. ft.) Each $1,039
Bath (up to 300 sq. ft.) Each $1,039
Other Remodel (up to 300 sq. ft.) Each $916
Additional remodel (per sq. ft. above 300) Per s.f. $2.29 Other Remodel (1000 sq. ft.) Each $2,516
Additional remodel (per sq. ft. above 1000) Per s.f. $0.53 Other Remodel (2500+ sq. ft.) Each $3,316
Additional remodel (per sq. ft. above 2500) Per s.f. $0.27 Re-roof
Residential (maximum $500 per building) Each 100 sf $25 Multi-Family Dwelling (maximum $500 per building) Each 100 sf $25 Commercial
Commercial (first 5,000 sf) Each $639
Commercial (each additional 2,500 sf) Each 2,500 sf $261 Retaining Wall (concrete or masonry)
Standard (up to 50 l.f.) Up to 50 l.f. $1,194
Additional retaining wall Each 50 l.f. $800
1060
CC 05-14-2024
1060 of 1197
Work Item
Unit FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 3 Miscellaneous Items
Special Design, 3-10' high (up to 50 l.f.) Up to 50 l.f. $1,733 Additional retaining wall Each 50 l.f. $1,061
Special Design, over 10' high (up to 50 l.f.) Up to 50 l.f. $1,994 Additional retaining wall Each 50 l.f. $1,322
Gravity/Crib Wall, 0-10' high (up to 50 l.f.) Up to 50 l.f. $1,733 Additional Gravity/Crib Wall Each 50 l.f. $1,061
Gravity/Crib Wall, over 10' high (up to 50 l.f.) Up to 50 l.f. $1,994 Additional Gravity/Crib Wall Each 50 l.f. $1,322
Revisions $266
Sauna—steam Each $916
Siding
Stone and Brick Veneer (interior or exterior) Up to 400 sf $639 All Other Up to 400 sf $508
Additional siding Each 400 sf $131
Signs
Directional Each $517
Each additional Directional Sign Each $269
Ground/Roof/Projecting Signs Each $517
Master Plan Sign Check Each $517
Rework of any existing Ground Sign Each $517
Other Sign Each $517
Reinspection Fee Each $124
Wall/Awning Sign, Non-Electric Each $386
Wall/Awning Sign, Electric Each $517
Skylight
50 sf or less (cumulative area) Each $517
Greater than 50 sf or structural Each $269
Stairs—First Flight First flight $517
Each additional flight Per flight $269
Storage Racks
0-8' high (up to 100 l.f.) First 100 l.f. $655
each additional 100 l.f. Each 100 l.f. $131
over 8' high (up to 100 l.f.) First 100 l.f. $786
each additional 100 l.f. Each 100 l.f. $131
Stucco Applications
Base Up to 400 sf $508
Additional Stucco Application Each 400 sf $131
Swimming Pool/Spa
Vinyl-lined Each $1,194
Fiberglass Each $1,194
1061
CC 05-14-2024
1061 of 1197
Work Item
Unit FY 2024-25 Proposed Fee
CITY OF CUPERTINO, CA
Resolution 24-XXX
Fees Effective July 14, 2024
Schedule D - Table 3 Miscellaneous Items
Gunite (up to 800 sf) Each $1,716
Additional pool (over 800 sf) Each 100 sf $400
Commercial pool (up to 800 sf) Each $2,910
Additional pool (over 800 sf) Each 100 sf $800
Spa or Hot Tub (Pre-fabricated) Each $517
Technology Fee Per Permit 5.8%
Temporary Structures Each $786
Tenant Improvement Preparation Each $517
Window or Sliding Glass Door
Replacement (first 8 windows) First 8 $378
Replacement (each additional 8 windows) Each 8 $131
New Window (non structural) Each $324
New window (structural shear wall/masonry) Each $458
Bay Window (structural) Each $458
Planning Department Review fee (New Construction and Additions) (Payable at permit submittal)
Each 20% of plan review and
inspection fees
Planning Hourly Rate (Misc Reviews) Per hour Refer to Schedule C Housing Mitigation In-lieu fees (Payable at Building Permit issuance) Per sq. ft. Refer to Schedule C Zoning, Planning, Municipal Code fees (Payable at Building Permit issuance) Per sq. ft. Refer to Schedule C Wireless Master Plan fee (Payable at Building Permit issuance) Each Refer to Schedule C Refunds - Plan Check Fees
1st review not started (within 3 Business of Submittal) 100% of Plan Review Fees Plan review more than 3 Business Days after the Date of Submittal No refund Refunds - Building Permit Fees
No inspections and permit is active (not expired) 80% of permit fees No inspections and permit is expired No refund
Inspections were provided No refund
Work without permit - based on current permit and plan check fees Double fees NOTE:
Fee Adjustments: In instances where the strict application of fees from this schedule would constitute a substantial inequity to an applicant or to the City, the Chief Building Official shall be authorized to adjust such fees on a case-by-case basis. Any such adjustments shall be recorded in writing and entered into the appropriate files.
Fees identified in this Table consist of 50% Plan Review Fee and 50% Inspection Fee 1062
CC 05-14-2024
1062 of 1197
RESOLUTION NO. 24-XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL AMENDING
PREVIOUS FEE SCHEDULES
WHEREAS, the State of California requires fees charged for service rendered not to exceed the cost of delivering said services; and WHEREAS, a public hearing has been held to review user fees; and WHEREAS, in 2023 the City conducted a Cost of Service (User Fee) Study and conducts annual updates pursuant to economic factors discussed in the staff report for this item to ensure that the fees charged do not exceed the cost of delivering the services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby:
1. Amend the user fees per attached Schedules A, B, C, and D to this resolution effective July 14, 2024.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a special meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 14th day of May, 2024, by the following vote:
Members of the City Council
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SIGNED:
________
Sheila Mohan, Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
1063
CC 05-14-2024
1063 of 1197
Resolution No. __________________