Written Communications (Updated 10-01-2024) — Cupertino City Council, October 1, 2024

CC 10-01-2024
Oral
Communications
Written Communications
From: Liang Chao
To: City Clerk
Subject: Fw: Information on Stevens Creek Office Center Proposal Date: Monday, September 30, 2024 9:38:54 AM
Attachments: 20883 Stevens Creek Site Plan.pdf
20883 Stevens Creek Project Description.pdf
Dear City Clerk,
Please enter the closed communication as written communication for the upcoming council meeting from a councilmember, per CMC 2.08.100.

Please enter the enclosed communication and attachments as written communication for the upcoming council meeting from a councilmember, per CMC 2.08.100.

I am submitting this comment at the request of my constituents.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Regards,
Liang
Liang Chao
Council Member
City Council
[email protected]
408-777-3192
1 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd.

Project Description & Narrative
September 23, 2024
Property Owner Owner Representative
STEVENS CREEK OCA OWNER, LLC Blair Volckmann
A Delaware limited liability company

Applicant Applicant Representative
Harvest Properties, Inc. Kevin Choy

Property Acreage
20807, 20813, 20823, 20856, and 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd 6.93 acres APNs: 326-32-50, -51, -52, and -53
General Plan Zoning
P(CG, Res) P(CG, Res)
Heart of the City Specific Plan – N. Crossroads Area

I. Introduction
Harvest Properties, Inc. on behalf of ownership is excited to propose and submit a 122-unit housing project on Stevens Creek Blvd. This project will produce much needed housing within the City limits of Cupertino and exceed the total housing production currently targeted in the City’s to be approved 3 rd draft of the 2023-2031 Housing Element, revised March 2024. The project will be built in multiple phases to be determined prior to construction, and a preliminary phasing plan will be developed and shared with the City of Cupertino throughout the development process.

With the focus on housing, the project qualifies as a housing development project under the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) by allocating a minimum of two-thirds of the project’s total square footage to residential uses. The project also satisfies the requirements of California’s Density Bonus Law (DBL) by providing 19.7% of the project’s for-sale residential units as affordable units for moderateincome households and paying an in lieu fee for the fractional for 0.4 units — making the project eligible for a 15% density bonus, and unlimited waivers and one concession / incentives pursuant to the DBL.

The project’s site plan design has been carefully considered based on the single-family neighborhood to our north and current complexion of mostly one- and two- buildings along Stevens Creek Boulevard. The project achieves this by placing single family dwelling units along the northern edge, three-story townhomes along Steven’s Creek Blvd., and including four-story townhome products central to the site. This will provide a nice setback for the higher density product and generally maintain the lower density nature of the current site. The site plan includes a meandering 2 private drive connecting Steven’s Creek Boulevard to Alves Drive intermixed with ample green space available to future residents and the project’s architecture will strive to meet the character of Cupertino.

In summary the project includes a mix of residential unit types totaling approximately 350,529 square feet in floor area as follows:
• 66 for-sale small lot single-family dwellings
• 56 for-sale townhomes
• ~31,700 sq. ft. of private open space
• 272 parking spaces
II. Existing Conditions
The existing land is comprised of several commercial office structures along Stevens Creek Blvd, “SCB”, Alves Drive, and the private drive connecting these two streets and one retail building fronting Stevens Creek Blvd. Addresses 20813, 20833, and 20883 SCB include two-story office structures with one level of below grade parking. 20863 and 20823 SCB includes two one-story office structures. 20807 SCB is a one-story retail structure. All structures onsite are greater than 40 years old and are approaching the end of their usable lives.

III. Project Components: Residential, Parking, Phasing
A. Residential
The residential component of the project is comprised of a mixture of three-story single family dwelling units and three-story and four-story townhomes. The mix of the residential units is as follows:
• 66 small lot single-family dwellings
o (47) Forty-seven, 4bed / 3.5bath dwellings at approximately 2,328 sq. ft. o (19) Nineteen, 4bed / 3.5bath dwellings at approximately 2,668 sq. ft. • 56 townhomes
o (14) Fourteen, 3bed / 3bath at approximately 1,380 sq. ft. o (14) Fourteen, 3bed / 3bath at approximately 1,607 sq. ft. o (14) Fourteen, 3bed / 3.5bath at approximately 1,788 sq. ft. o (14) Fourteen, 4bed / 3.5bath at approximately 2,269 sq. ft.

B. Parking
The project includes 272 parking spaces. Of those spaces 244 spaces will be dedicated to the 3 residential units providing a parking ratio of 2.00 dedicated to each unit. Additionally, the project will provide 28 guest spaces scattered throughout the project.

C. Construction Phasing Plan
The project is anticipated to be constructed in multiple phases. Due to the nature of for-sale development and construction, the different product types, single family dwellings and townhomes, will likely be constructed and sold in multiple phases.

III. Design Narratives
A. Architectural
The project at 220807-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard is designed to enhance housing options in the Crossroads subarea of Cupertino’s Heart of the City Specific Plan. Currently, the site comprises 1- and 2-story office and commercial buildings with surface parking. Surrounding uses include Abundant Assembly of God Church to the west, Whole Foods Market to the southwest, various commercial properties to the south and southeast, Happy Child Development Center and YMCA to the northeast, and single-family homes to the northwest.

The proposal includes 122 new residential units, comprising 56 units in seven 3-story townhouse buildings off Stevens Creek Boulevard and 66 units in 3-story single-family detached homes off Alves Drive. 24 units will be offered at below market rate, making the project eligible for concessions and waivers under State Density Bonus Law. Requested waivers include, but may not be limited to, side and rear setbacks and a reduction in parking requirements.

The single-family detached homes offer two floor plan types, both featuring 4 bedrooms and 3.5 baths, with sizes ranging from 2,328 to 2,668 square feet and each including a 2-car private garage. The townhouses offer four floor plan types: three with 3 bedrooms and 3-3.5 baths, and one with 4 bedrooms and 3.5 baths. These townhomes range from 1,380 to 2,269 square feet, each with a 2-car private garage. Every home will have private open spaces in the form of porches, yards, decks, or rooftop terraces. Entries for each home are designed to face common open space areas or streets.

The architectural styles for the project reflect northern California and Cupertino’s design traditions while appealing to modern buyers. The Spanish style features lower-pitched roofs with gable ends, traditional stucco finishes, and arched or corbeled entries. The Modern French style includes shallow-pitched main roofs with steeper gable ends, simple bay window details, and fiber cement panel accents. The Craftsman style, applied to the single-family detached homes, showcases a 6:12 roof pitch, gable ends with shingle-style siding, deep eaves with detailed trim, as well as bracket and corbel details.
4 The project employs quality materials and a range of color schemes: four for the townhomes and nine for the single-family homes. Spanish-style homes will have low ‘S’ profile concrete roof tile and stucco finish exteriors with tile details, while Modern French homes will feature stucco with cementitious paneling and composition roofing typical with metal roofing accents over entry porches. Craftsman-style homes will use stucco, shingle siding, composition shingles, and brick veneer. The design incorporates sustainable features and bird-safe elements to align with environmental considerations.

Overall, this development aims to meet the demand for new housing with a blend of traditional architectural characteristics and modern lifestyle design preferences.

B. Landscape
The landscape design aims to create a harmonious blend of contemporary urban living and thoughtfully designed outdoor spaces. The landscape design emphasizes a pedestrian-friendly environment with a comprehensive pathway network, including inviting paseos that wind through the neighborhood. These paseos link the homes to communal areas, fostering a strong sense of connectivity and ease of movement. The central common open space is a standout feature, designed as a dynamic gathering hub. It is shaded by carefully selected trees, which provide comfort and beauty, making the space inviting for residents throughout the year. This area also features an active lawn area, ideal for casual recreation or more active use, and amenities such as covered central picnic area for outdoor dining, a small, covered seating area for passive use, open-air workstations that support a modern, flexible lifestyle, and several smaller picnic areas. Pathways and paseos effortlessly link the homes to the common open space and the adjacent retail, encouraging exploration and interaction within the community. The overall design strikes a balance between contemporary style and the nurturing presence of nature, creating a landscape that enhances both social connections and individual relaxation. An emphasis has been placed on drought tolerant, climate adapted species and a state of the art smart irrigation system that will allow the community to remain a vital piece of Cupertino’s residential landscape.

Response to Project Design Comment 12 – Heart of the City Specific Plan for design guidelines related to Building Increment, Special Architectural Features, Building Clusters, Façade Composition, Windows, Roofs, and Common Open Space.

The Heart of the City Specific plan calls for a double row of Pyrus calleryana along Stevens Creek Blvd. Our intent is to provide a similar look to Pyrus within the 10’ parkway strip by using Lagerstroemia ‘Natchez’. Our experience with Pears is that they pose a short- and long-term maintenance challenge, as their branches are brittle. Pears also produce a less than desirable odor when flowering. They are also highly susceptible to pests such as aphids, scales and or borers.

We are proposing a tall, columnar tree (Acer ‘Armstrong’) between the unit and the sidewalk, that allow for better screening of the taller private residences. The proposed tree selections along 5 Steven’s Creek Blvd still allow for a double row of trees per the Specific Plan. This being a residential application along Steven’s Creek, we are open to working with the City to agree upon a streetscape design that meets the requirements of the city as well as expectations of future homeowners.

Response to Project Design Comment 14 - Incorporation of green building aspects to the maximum extent feasible is highly encouraged.

The landscape design takes into account the following green building features:

Water efficiency – though complete irrigation plans are not included as part of this process, and will be submitted prior to Building Permit issuance, the intent of the landscape and irrigation design is to minimize water usage through drought tolerant, climate adapted plants – trees, shrubs, and groundcovers. The irrigation system will be designed to be state of the art, with soil and weather sensors as well as utilize low flow nozzles. Spray is only planned for the active lawn area in the central area. All other plants will be irrigated with drip or bubblers.

Response to Project Design Comment 16 – Dark Sky Lighting Compliance All fixtures have been selected to comply with Dark Sky Lighting Compliance. See Lighting Plan and Photometrics on sheets L5-L7.

Response to Project Design Comment 37 – Water Efficient Landscape Checklist & Water Budget Calculations to be completed
Water efficient landscape checklist and calculations have been provided on sheets L18-19.

III. Applicable Land Use Policies
A. POLICY LU-1.4: PARCEL ASSEMBLY Encourage parcel assembly and discourage parcelization to ensure that infill development meets City standards and provides adequate buffers to neighborhoods.

While the project will increase the number of parcels within the City, the project recognizes the need for housing within the City of Cupertino and delivers housing in a manner typical with for-sale developments. By providing individual parcels in lieu of condos for the singlefamily dwelling units, the project ensures an efficient financing capability for these units.

B. POLICY LU-13.3: PARCEL ASSEMBLY Encourage the assembly of parcels to foster new development projects that can provide high-quality development with adequate buffers for neighborhoods.

The project recognizes its neighbors and specifically located the denser townhome development adjacent to the retailers to the east, west, and south. Less dense, singlefamily dwelling units have been located adjacent to the single-family dwelling units along Alves Drive.
6 C. POLICY LU-2.2: PEDESTRIAN-ORIENTED PUBLIC SPACES Require developments to incorporate pedestrian-scaled elements along the street and within the development such as parks, plazas, active uses along the street, active uses, entries, outdoor dining and public art.

The project proposes to continue the implementation of the City’s pedestrian guidelines along Stevens Creek Blvd. In addition, the project proposes multiple outdoor gathering areas for the project’s residents which include capabilities to gather, eat, and develop a community.

D. POLICY LU-3.1: SITE PLANNING Ensure that project sites are planned appropriately to create a network of connected internal streets that improve pedestrian and bicycle access, provide public open space and building layouts that support city goals related to streetscape character for various Planning Areas and corridors.

The project proposes internal streets that promote connection between Alves and Stevens Creek via a meandering private drive in addition to pedestrian and bicycle routes.

E. STRATEGY LU-3.3.1: Attractive Design. Emphasize attractive building and site design by paying careful attention to building scale, mass, placement, architecture, materials, landscaping, screening of equipment, loading areas, signage and other design considerations.

The Project proposes 3-story structures in line with neighboring properties height, scale, and mass. Thoughtfully design architecture throughout develop a sense of place and variation for the residential units. For further information see the architectural narrative.

F. STRATEGY LU-3.3.2: Mass and Scale. Ensure that the scale and interrelationships of new and old development complement each other. Buildings should be grouped to create a feeling of spatial unity.

The Project proposes 3-story structures in line with neighboring properties height, scale, and mass. The assemblage of structures on the site promote a sense of unity due to similarities in design, but also provide for distinct architectural expressions. For further information see the Project’s architectural narrative and plans.

G. STRATEGY LU-3.3.3: Transitions. Buildings should be designed to avoid abrupt transitions with existing development, whether they are adjacent or across the street. Consider reduced heights, buffers and/or landscaping to transition to residential and/or low-intensity uses in order to reduce visual and privacy impacts.

The project proposes heights and masses in-line with neighboring developments.

Setbacks at neighboring properties have been carefully considered to ensure proper visual and privacy impacts.

H. STRATEGY LU-3.3.4: Compatibility. Ensure that the floor area ratios of multi-family residential developments are compatible with buildings in the surrounding area. Include a mix of unit types and avoid excessively large units.

The project proposes an FAR at approximately 1.0. The project’s unit types are in line with the surrounding single-family neighborhood.

I. STRATEGY LU-3.3.5: Building Location. Encourage building location and entries closer to the street while meeting appropriate landscaping and setback requirements.

The project has met the City’s setback along Stevens Creek Blvd to promote a better living 7 experience. The project will utilize state density bonus law to reduce the setback along Alves, but is still proposing a landscaping buffer along Alves which will allow for significant planting inclusive of two rows of trees and additional landscaping.

J. STRATEGY LU-3.3.6: Architecture and Articulation. Promote high-quality architecture, appropriate building articulation and use of special materials and architectural detailing to enhance visual interest.

See the project’s architectural design narrative.

K. STRATEGY LU-3.3.7: Street Interface. Ensure development enhances pedestrian activity by providing active uses within mixed-use areas and appropriate design features within residential areas along a majority of the building frontage facing the street. Mixed-use development should include retail, restaurant, outdoor dining, main entries, etc.

Residential development should include main entrances, lobbies, front stoops and porches, open space and other similar features.

The project proposes a series of entries along Stevens Creek Blvd and Alves Drive which include private porches and significant open space.

L. STRATEGY LU-3.3.10: Entrances. In multi-family projects where residential uses may front on streets, require pedestrian-scaled elements such as entries, stoops and porches along the street.

The project proposes a series of entries along Stevens Creek Blvd and Alves Drive which include private porches and significant open space.

M. STRATEGY LU-3.3.11: Multiple-Story Buildings and Residential Districts. Allow construction of multiple story buildings if it is found that nearby residential districts will not suffer from privacy intrusion or be overwhelmed by the scale of a building or group of buildings.

The project proposes 3-story single family dwelling units adjacent to our neighboring residential district, respecting the scale and mass of those developments.

N. POLICY LU-3.4: PARKING In surface lots, parking arrangements should be based on the successful operation of buildings; however, parking to the side or rear of buildings is desirable. No visible garages shall be permitted along the street frontage. Above grade structures shall not be located along street frontages and shall be lined with active uses on the ground floor on internal street frontages. Subsurface/deck parking is allowed provided it is adequately screened from the street and/or adjacent residential development.

The project proposes individual unit garage entries internal to the site and provides guest parking along the interior streets not visible from the project frontage. The project’s garages are in line with typical townhome and single family dwelling units which typically provide parking at the ground floor in addition to living uses.

O. POLICY LU-4.2: STREET TREES AND LANDSCAPING Ensure that tree planting and landscaping along streets visually enhances the streetscape and is consistent for the vision for each Planning Area (Special Areas and Neighborhoods):

See the landscape narrative.
a. Maximize street tree planting along arterial street frontages between buildings and/or parking lots.
8 The project proposes street trees along all arterial street frontages. b. Enhance major arterials and connectors with landscaped medians to enhance their visual character and serve as traffic calming devices.

The project proposes to meet the sidewalk design of Stevens Creek Blvd inclusive of landscaping buffers.
c. Landscape urban areas with formal planting arrangements.

The project proposes a landscape design as proposed by a landscape architect and to be professionally maintained. See landscape drawings.

P. POLICY LU-5.3: ENHANCE CONNECTIONS Look for opportunities to enhance publiclyaccessible pedestrian and bicycle connections with new development or redevelopment.

The project proposes to realize the Steves Creek Blvd sidewalk design implemented just to the project’s west, thus extending the City’s vision for pedestrian access along Stevens Creek Blvd.

Q. POLICY LU-13.6: BUILDING FORM Buildings should be high-quality, with pedestrianoriented and active uses along the street.

See the project’s architectural narrative and plans.

R. STRATEGY LU-13.7.1: Streetscape. Provide active uses along the street frontage, bike lanes, sidewalks that support pedestrian-oriented activity, improved pedestrian crossings at street intersections, and attractive transit facilities (e.g., bus stops, benches, etc.).

The projects street frontage is in line with other single family and townhome developments.

The project does not front along any pedestrian crossings, intersections, or transit facilities.

S. STRATEGY LU-13.7.2: Street trees and Landscaping. Create a cohesive visual image with street tree plantings along the corridor, but with distinct tree types for each sub-area to support its distinct character and function.

See the project’s landscape narrative and plans.

T. STRATEGY LU-13.7.3: Connectivity. Properties within a block should be inter-connected with shared access drives. Provide pedestrian paths to enhance public access to and through the development. New development, particularly on corner lots, should provide pedestrian and bicycle improvements along side streets to enhance connections to surrounding neighborhoods.

The project has two public facing frontages along Alves Dr and Steves Creek Blvd. The project includes vehicular access to all residential units and a connection from Alves to Stevens Creek Blvd.

IV. Statement of Applicability of the State Density Bonus Law and Request for Waivers The project intends to utilize State Density Bonus Law. By providing 24 affordable units on-site, the project will achieve a 19.7% affordability component on-site and will pay an in-lieu fee for 0.4 units.

The project will have access to unlimited waivers and one incentive / concession in addition to the reduction of parking requirements and a 15% density bonus. The project has identified the following waivers at this time:
9 1. Side Setback per HOC1.01.030 (C)(1)(a)

2. Rear Setback per HOC1.01.030 (C)(2)

3. Additional Setback to Residentially Developed Parcels HOC1.01.040 (E)(2)

4. Parking per CMC Table 19.36.070(J)

5. Parking ratio per City of Cupertino zoning
The project reserves the right to update the affordability component and the list of waivers and incentives / concessions requested throughout the entitlement process.

IV. Statement of Applicability of State Law AB2097 – Automobile Parking Reduction The project is evaluating its unit mix and parking and notes that the Project is currently in compliance with the reduced parking requirements per State Density Bonus Law. However, the project reserves the right to utilize AB2097 to further reduce parking ratios during the entitlement process if deemed necessary by the Applicant. The Project can utilize AB2097 based on the proximity, less than a ½ mile, to a “Major Transit” stop at the corner of Stevens Creek Blvd and S De Anza Blvd where multiple bus lines intersect, and the planned future transit stop as noted in “Steves Creek Boulevard Corridor Vision Study”.

IV. Fiscal Impact Analysis
The project’s current tax bill amounts to a total of ~$334,000 per year. The proposed project of 122 for-sale residential units will generate approximately ~$3,000,000 per year in annual tax revenue for the City of Cupertino based on the assumed 1.16% property tax rate currently effective. This results in a net benefit of approximately ~$2,660,000 in annual tax revenue to the City of Cupertino.

Thank you for your time and consideration on this project.

20'-0" 20'-0" 47'-6"
52'-6"
20'-0" 14'-0" 26'-0" 4'-0"
4'-0" 26'-0" 4'-0" 4'-0" 26'-0" 4'-0"
4'-0" 26'-0" 4'-0"
4'-0" 26'-0" 4'-0"
4'-0" 26'-0" 4'-0" 4'-0" 26'-0" 4'-0" 26'-0" 4'-0"
4'-0" 26'-0" 4'-0" 4'-0" 26'-0" 5'-0" 21'-3" 14'-3" 15'-7" 12'-1" 21'-0"
21'-0" 32'-0" 29'-0" 29'-0" 29'-0" 29'-0" 29'-0" 32'-0" 3'-6" 3'-6" 7'-0" 14'-0" 19'-0" 3'-6" 26'-0" 19'-0"3'-6" 19'-0" 26'-0" 19'-0" 19'-0" 26'-0" 19'-0" 3'-0" 26'-0" 13'-0" 20'-10" 26'-0" 21'-0" 21'-0" 26'-0" 21'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0" 26'-5" 6'-0" 6'-1" 26'-6"8'-0" 8'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0" 13'-8" 16'-8"
15'-11" 8'-2"
17'-3" 20'-3" 42'-0" 42'-0" 51'-7" 51'-7" 10'-0" 26'-0" 15'-7" 10'-0" 26'-0" 15'-7" 8-PLEX Modern French 8-PLEX Modern French 8-PLEX Modern French 8-PLEX Spanish 8-PLEX Spanish Stevens Creek Blvd Alves Dr Saich Way 8-PLEX Modern French 8-PLEX Spanish 6'-1" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 17 16 15 14 13 12 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 60 59 58 57 56 55 54 53 52 51 50 TH-1 61 62 63 64 65 66 TH-2 TH-3 TH-4 TH-5 TH-6 TH-7

A STREET B STREET

C STREET D STREET

E STREET F STREET H STREET
G STREETI STREET J STREET K STREET L STREET 11'-6" * * * * * *Proposed Public Art . Below Market Rate (BMR) Units (24 Total) * Units meeting CBC Chapter 1102A.3.1 Housing Accessibility (6 Total) 0 25 50 100 A0-1.3 ARCHTECTURAL SITE PLAN SHEET INFORMATION GENERAL PLANNING APPLICATION CUPERTINO, CA # 20240298 SEPTEMBER 20, 2024 20807-20883 STEVENS CREEK BLVD OWNERSHIP: STEVENS CREEK OCA OWNER, LLC 180 Grand Ave, Ste. 1400 Oakland, CA 94612 From: Liang Chao
To: [email protected]; City Clerk
Subject: Fwd: Opposition to Proposed Development at 20739 Scofield Drive Date: Monday, September 30, 2024 9:35:26 AM
Dear Resident,
Thank you for reaching out with your comments.

Due to a change in the implementation of how written communication is collected for the upcoming council meeting, your email will not be included in the official record unless a councilmember forwards it to the City Clerk.

Dear City Clerk,
Please enter the attached communication as written communication for the upcoming council meeting from a councilmember, per CMC 2.08.100.

I am submitting this comment at the request of my constituents to ensure that community voices are included in written communications of council meetings as requested, rather than at the discretion of councilmembers, which might inadvertently leave out some minority voices.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Regards,
Liang
~ Cupertino City Council (elected in 2018, re-elected in 2022) Liang Chao
Councilmember
City Council
[email protected]
408-777-3192
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2024 7:44 AM
To: City Council <[email protected]>; City Clerk <[email protected]>; Pamela Wu <[email protected]>; Piu Ghosh (she/her) <[email protected]>; City of Cupertino Planning Dept. <[email protected]>; Luke Connolly <[email protected]>; Benjamin Fu <[email protected]>
Subject: Opposition to Proposed Development at 20739 Scofield Drive Dear City Council and Planning Commission,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed development at 20739 Scofield Drive. While I understand the need for affordable housing, this project poses significant safety risks and is not appropriate for our neighborhood.

With only 4 of the 20 units designated as affordable, the project clearly prioritizes personal profit over community well-being. Its proximity to Faria Elementary raises serious concerns, as Scofield Drive already experiences heavy traffic and lacks sidewalks, putting children walking to and from school in danger. Adding 20 housing units and the additional cars they will bring will only worsen these risks.

Furthermore, the scale and density of this development are out of place in our neighborhood and threaten to negatively impact the character of our community.

I urge you to reject this proposal to protect the safety, character, and future of Cupertino.

Thank you for your consideration.

Dear City Clerk,
Please include in written communications for the next city council meeting. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Resident, Cupertino
From: Liang Chao
To: Craig Cummings; City Clerk
Subject: Fw: Please Rezone Evulich Ct. Back to R1
Date: Monday, September 30, 2024 9:31:05 AM
Dear Resident,
Thank you for reaching out with your comments.

Dear City Clerk,
Please enter the attached communication as written communication for the upcoming council meeting from a councilmember, per CMC 2.08.100.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Regards,
Liang
Liang Chao
Council Member
City Council
[email protected]
408-777-3192
From: Craig Cummings <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2024 11:42 AM
To: Luke Connolly <[email protected]>; Piu Ghosh (she/her) <[email protected]>; Pamela Wu <[email protected]>; City Council <[email protected]>; City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Please Rezone Evulich Ct. Back to R1
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear City Clerk,
Please include the below as written communications for items not on agenda for the upcoming city council meeting.

Mayor Sheila Mohan
Cupertino City Council Members
City Manager Pamela Wu
City Planners Luke and Piu
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Dear Cupertino City Council Members,
I am writing to express my deep concerns regarding the recent zoning change of the properties located on Evulich Court in Cupertino, with Associated Parcel Numbers (APNs) 356-06-001, 356-06-002, 356-06-003, & 356-06-004. I believe this zoning change may not have followed the proper legal procedures, particularly those governing the selection of housing element sites in California, community input, and will have severe impacts on the existing neighborhood.

The zoning change in question has dramatically altered the permitted density for these parcels:

1. Original zoning: R1 (single-family home zoning, 1-5 units/acre)

2. New zoning: R3/TH (20-35 units/acre)
This represents one of the most significant density increases among all the sites listed in the Housing Element, raising concerns about the fairness and appropriateness of this particular change. To illustrate this point, I'd like to draw your attention to other R1 sites in the Housing Element and their proposed changes:

1. Site ID 12 (APN 316-04-064, 19820 Homestead Rd):
- Original zoning: R1 (1-5 units/acre)
- Proposed zoning: R3 (10-20 units/acre)

2. Site ID 24 (APN 359-13-019, 20865 Mcclellan Rd):
- Original zoning: R1-10 (1-5 units/acre)
- Proposed zoning: R3 (10-20 units/acre)

3. Site ID 31 (APN 327-20-034, 10231 Adriana Ave):
- Original zoning: R1 (1-5 units/acre)
- Proposed zoning: R3/TH (5-10 units/acre)
As you can see, while these sites are also experiencing increases in density, none approach the dramatic jump from 1-5 units/acre to 20-35 units/acre that the Evulich Court properties are facing.

Furthermore, I must emphasize that all adjoining homes to the Evulich Court properties are zoned R1. This dramatic zoning change creates a stark inconsistency in the neighborhood.

More alarmingly, the builder is requesting multiple waivers that would significantly deviate from standard requirements:

1. Height Waiver: The proposal is for buildings up to 39 feet high, which is 9 feet higher than the current 30-foot limit for the R3 zone in the area.

2. Setback Waiver: The plan includes setbacks as small as 5 feet for street sides and 6 feet for interior sides, compared to the standard 12 feet and 6-16 feet respectively.

3. Floor Area Coverage Waiver: The proposed floor area ratio is 127% of the net lot area, far exceeding the standard 70% maximum.

4. Parking Waiver: The plan proposes 2.6 parking spaces per unit, below the required 2.8 spaces per unit.

These waivers, would result in a development that is dramatically out of character with the surrounding neighborhood and could lead to significant negative impacts:

1. The extreme contrast in building height and proximity to property lines will significantly impact the privacy, sunlight, and overall quality of life for neighboring residents.

2. Such a dramatic change in neighborhood character may negatively affect property values of surrounding homes.

3. The reduced parking requirements could lead to increased street parking and traffic congestion in an area not designed for such density.

4. The infrastructure of the neighborhood, designed for low-density housing, may not be adequate to support such a significant increase in population density.

5. The excessive floor area coverage could lead to issues with stormwater management and reduce green space in the neighborhood.

Of particular concern is the apparent lack of proper notification and community engagement in this process. Neighbors living on Linda Vista Drive do not recall receiving any notification about the upzoning process. This raises serious questions about the transparency and fairness of the decision-making process.

In community surveys conducted by the consultant, this site received the lowest positive rating among all proposed housing sites. Specifically, the favorability score for this site was a mere 18%, and it received the highest number of responses. This extraordinarily low score, combined with the high response rate, clearly indicates overwhelming community opposition to such a dramatic change in this neighborhood. It's worth noting that this score falls far below the 40% threshold that the city planners identified as a priority for council consideration, indicating that this site should be immediately reevaluated and likely removed from consideration.

Given these concerns, I strongly urge the City Council to consider alternative zoning options that could increase housing density while still maintaining the character of the neighborhood. Specifically, I propose that the Council explore the possibility of rezoning the site as R1-5000. This zoning designation could potentially increase the number of homes that can be built on the site without dramatically altering the existing neighborhood character. This approach would:

1. Moderately increase housing density to help meet the city's housing goals

2. Maintain a single-family home character that is consistent with the surrounding area

3. Likely face less community opposition, given that it represents a more modest change

4. Better balance the city's housing needs with the concerns and preferences of existing residents

5. Ensure that development adheres to established setback, height, and parking requirements, preserving neighborhood aesthetics and functionality Crucially, R1 sites, including the proposed R1-5000 zoning, are not eligible for the same density bonus waivers that R3/TH multi-family sites can receive. This means that any development under R1-5000 zoning would have to comply with standard requirements for setbacks, height limits, and parking. This would address many of the concerns raised about the current R3/TH rezoning proposal, including the extreme height of proposed buildings (up to 39 feet), minimal setbacks (as low as 5 feet for street sides and 6 feet for interior sides), excessive floor area coverage (127% of net lot area), and reduced parking requirements. By choosing R1-5000 zoning instead of R3/TH, the City can ensure that any new development on this site remains in harmony with the existing neighborhood while still increasing housing density, preventing the potential negative impacts associated with the extensive waivers currently being requested under the R3/TH zoning proposal.

I believe this alternative could provide a compromise solution that addresses both the need for increased housing and the community's desire to preserve the essential character of the neighborhood, all while adhering to established development standards.

In light of these concerns and the proposed alternative, I ask that the City Council schedule two specific agenda items for an upcoming council meeting:

Agenda Item 1: A comprehensive review and discussion of the following points regarding the Evulich Court rezoning:

1. Details on the process followed for this specific zoning change, including documentation of all attempts to notify affected residents

2. Documentation showing how the city ensured compliance with state law regarding housing element site selection

3. An explanation for why this site was chosen for such a dramatic increase in density compared to other R1 sites in the city, especially given the extremely low 18% favorability score and high response rate

4. Clarification on the criteria used to determine density increases across different neighborhoods

5. An assessment of the potential impacts on neighboring properties, including privacy, shadowing, and property values

6. A review of the infrastructure capacity to support such a significant density increase

8. A full disclosure of the community survey results related to this site and an explanation of how these results, particularly the strikingly low 18% favorability score and high response rate, were factored into the decision-making process
Agenda Item 2: A proposal to restore the zoning of the Evulich Court properties to R1, with consideration of lower minimum lot size limits of 5,000 square feet (R1-5000 zoning).

Additionally, I request that this agenda include:

1. A review of the zoning change process for this site, with particular attention to the notification procedures

2. Consideration of transitional zoning or additional requirements to mitigate the impact on neighboring R1 properties

3. Presentation of a comprehensive traffic and parking study assessing the impact of the reduced parking requirements

4. Presentation of an environmental impact assessment, particularly regarding the increased lot coverage and its effects on local ecosystems and stormwater management

5. A comparative analysis of how other sites with low favorability scores were handled in the planning process
I believe it is crucial that our city's development plans adhere to all applicable laws and regulations, and that changes of this magnitude are made with full transparency and community input. The stark contrast between the density increase at Evulich Court and other R1 sites in the city, combined with the potential negative impacts on the existing neighborhood and the overwhelmingly low 18% community support (despite high engagement), demands immediate reconsideration of this site's inclusion in the Housing Element as an R3/TH zone.

I urge the City Council to schedule these agenda items at the earliest possible meeting and to provide ample notice to all affected residents to ensure their participation in this crucial discussion.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your prompt response confirming the scheduling of these agenda items and to participating in a thorough discussion of these critical issues.

Sincerely,
Craig Cummings
22034 Baxley Ct
Cupertino
From: Liang Chao
To: Helena Cohen; City Clerk
Subject: Fw: I AM IMPLORING YOU to REZONE Evulich Ct. Back to R1 Date: Monday, September 30, 2024 9:30:42 AM
Dear Resident,
Thank you for reaching out with your comments.

Dear City Clerk,
Please enter the attached communication as written communication for the upcoming council meeting from a councilmember, per CMC 2.08.100.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Regards,
Liang
Liang Chao
Council Member
City Council
[email protected]
408-777-3192
From: Helena Cohen <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2024 11:55 AM
Subject: I AM IMPLORING YOU to REZONE Evulich Ct. Back to R1 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear City Clerk,
Please include the below as written communications for items not on the agenda for the upcoming city council meeting.

The zoning change in question has dramatically altered the permitted density for these parcels:

1. Original zoning: R1 (single-family home zoning, 1-5 units/acre)

1. Site ID 12 (APN 316-04-064, 19820 Homestead Rd):
- Original zoning: R1 (1-5 units/acre)
- Proposed zoning: R3 (10-20 units/acre)

2. Site ID 24 (APN 359-13-019, 20865 Mcclellan Rd):
- Original zoning: R1-10 (1-5 units/acre)
- Proposed zoning: R3 (10-20 units/acre)

I must emphasize that all adjoining homes to the Evulich Court properties are zoned R1. This dramatic zoning change creates a stark inconsistency in the neighborhood. More alarmingly, the builder is requesting multiple waivers that would significantly deviate from standard requirements:

1. Height Waiver: The proposal is for buildings up to 39 feet high, which is 9 feet higher than the current 30-foot limit for the R3 zone in the area.

2. Setback Waiver: The plan includes setbacks as small as 5 feet for street sides and 6 feet for interior sides, compared to the standard 12 feet and 6-16 feet respectively.

3. Floor Area Coverage Waiver: The proposed floor area ratio is 127% of the net lot area, far exceeding the standard 70% maximum.

4. Parking Waiver: The plan proposes 2.6 parking spaces per unit, below the required 2.8 spaces per unit.

These waivers would result in a development that is dramatically out of character with the surrounding neighborhood and could lead to significant negative impacts:

1. The extreme contrast in building height and proximity to property lines will significantly impact neighboring residents' privacy, sunlight, and overall quality of life.

2. Such a dramatic change in neighborhood character may negatively affect the property values of surrounding homes.

3. The reduced parking requirements could lead to increased street parking and untenable traffic congestion in an area not designed for such density.

4. The infrastructure of the neighborhood, designed for low-density housing, may not be adequate to support such a significant increase in population density.

5. The excessive floor area coverage would likely lead to issues with stormwater management and reduce green space in the neighborhood.

Given these grave concerns, I strongly urge the City Council to consider alternative zoning options that could increase housing density while still maintaining the character of the neighborhood. Specifically, I, and hundreds of other neighbors, propose that the Council explore the possibility of rezoning the site as R1-5000. This zoning designation could potentially increase the number of homes that can be built on the site without dramatically altering the existing neighborhood character. This approach would: