CC 12-16-2025 Searchable Packet.pdf — Cupertino City Council, December 16, 2025 (part 9 of 9)

Format Type:

Filename:

Format Type:

COCU-34_HRA.PFL
Potential Temperature Profile
Base Elevation above MSL (for Primary Met Tower): 15.50 [m] Wind Direction
Rotation Adjustment [deg]:

Meteorological Station Data
Upper Air
Station No. Year Station Name
Surface
Stations X Coordinate [m] Y Coordinate [m]
2015
2015 OAKLAND/WSO AP
Default AERMET format
Wind Speed
Wind Speeds are Vector Mean (Not Scalar Means)
Data Period
Start Date: 1/1/2012 Start Hour: 1 End Date: 12/31/2017 End Hour: 24 Data Period to Process

10.8 8.23

5.14 3.09

1.54 No Upper Bound
Wind Speed [m/s] Stability Category Wind Speed [m/s]
F
E
D
C
B
A
Stability Category
Wind Speed Categories
AERMOD View by Lakes Environmental Software ME - 1 6/25/2025 Project File: C:\Users\azimny\Desktop\COCU-34_HRA\COCU-34_HRA.isc 2093
CC 12-16-2025
2093 of 2165
2094
CC 12-16-2025
2094 of 2165
From: Kitty Moore
To: City Clerk; Kirsten Squarcia; Lauren Sapudar
Subject: Written Communications Item 2 Planning Commission November 12, 2025 Date: Tuesday, November 11, 2025 10:00:38 AM
Attachments: 20251020_Revised SVE Progress Report_2023-17s.pdf Dear City Clerk,
Please include the following along with the attached PDF for Written Communications for Item 2 of the Planning Commission meeting November 12, 2025:

The United Furniture/Idlewild/East Estates Dr. Project is on Geotracker and the uploaded documents may be found here: https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/profile_report? global_id=T10000021095
The Placeworks Categorical Exemption Memo (Category 32) and the Cupertino Staff Report do not contain a complete record and the most recent information regarding the site contamination. The most recent, October 20, 2025 letter from SCCDEH, for instance, is attached and an excerpt is here:
"The Department of Environmental Health (DEH) has reviewed the Revised 2025 Second Quarter Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) Progress Report (Report) prepared by Terraphase Engineering and dated September 30, 2025. The Report documents operational parameters of the SVE system and soil vapor concentrations of tetrachloroethene (PCE) at several sampling locations across the site. DEH accepts the Report.

The Report states “Current PCE concentrations in the subsurface are well below levels of concern and are expected to be effectively mitigated by a properly installed vapor mitigation system, which will protect future occupants living at the Site.” The DEH does not agree with this statement. The current concentrations of PCE reported beneath the site exceed the Environmental Screening Level (ESL) for both commercial and residential land uses by one to two orders of magnitude and continue to represent a risk for vapor intrusion." The above mentioned letter is linked here:
https://documents.geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/regulators/deliverable_documents/4966718375/20251020_Revised%20SVE%20Progress%20Report_2023-17s.pdf Another report was due to the Regulator on October 31, 2025 and another in January, 2026.

Placeworks accessed the Geotracker records May 5, 2025 for this site according to their Memo page 63: State Water Resources Control Board, 2024, GeoTracker, https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/profile_report.asp?global_id=T10000021095, accessed May 5, 2025.

The last letter from SCCDEH would have been April 3, 2025 that Placeworks would have seen given that access date, here is a link to that letter:
https://documents.geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/regulators/deliverable_documents/1255811393/20250403_Requirement%20for%20Remedial%20Progress%20Reports_2023-

17.pdf
ONE-HOUR DRY CLEANERS (T10000021095) - (MAP) SIGN UP FOR EMAIL ALERTS 10045 EAST ESTATES DRIVE
CUPERTINO, CA 95014 SANTA CLARA COUNTY

CLEANUP PROGRAM SITE (INFO)
OPEN - REMEDIATION AS OF 6/1/2024 - DEFINITION

PRINTABLE CASE SUMMARY / CSM REPORT

CLEANUP OVERSIGHT AGENCIES
SANTA CLARA COUNTY LOP (LEAD) - CASE #: 2023-17s
CASE MANAGER: AARON COSTA
Summary
Cleanup Action Report
Regulatory Activities
Environmental Data (ESI)
Site Maps / Documents
Community Involvement
Related Cases
Regulatory Profile

PRINTABLE CASE SUMMARY

CLEANUP STATUS - DEFINITIONS
OPEN - REMEDIATION AS OF 6/1/2024 - CLEANUP STATUS HISTORY

POTENTIAL CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN

TETRACHLOROETHYLENE (PCE)

POTENTIAL MEDIA OF CONCERN

SOIL VAPOR, UNDER INVESTIGATION

FILE LOCATION

ALL FILES ARE ON GEOTRACKER OR IN THE LOCAL AGENCY DATABASE

DESIGNATED GROUNDWATER BENEFICIAL USE(S) - DEFINITIONS

MUN, AGR, IND, PROC

DWR GROUNDWATER SUB-BASIN NAME
Santa Clara Valley - Santa Clara (2-009.02)

CALWATER WATERSHED NAME
Santa Clara - Palo Alto (205.50)
Kitty Moore
Vice Mayor
City Council
[email protected]
(408) 777-1389
2095
CC 12-16-2025
2095 of 2165
County of Santa Clara
Department of Environmental Health
Hazardous Materials Compliance Division
1555 Berger Drive, Suite 300
San José, CA 95112-2716
(408) 918-3400
www.ehinfo.org/hazmat
Board of Supervisors: Sylvia Arenas, Betty Duong, Otto Lee, Susan Ellenberg, Margaret Abe-Koga County Executive: James R. Williams
October 20, 2025

SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL ONLY
Idlewild TIC
c/o Victor Castello
[email protected]
Re: One-Hour Dry Cleaners
10045 East Estates Dr., Cupertino, CA 95014
APN: 369-06-022
Site Cleanup Program Case No. 2023-17s
GeoTracker ID No. T10000021095
Dear Mr. Castello,
The Department of Environmental Health (DEH) has reviewed the Revised 2025 Second Quarter Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) Progress Report (Report) prepared by Terraphase Engineering and dated September 30, 2025.

The Report documents operational parameters of the SVE system and soil vapor concentrations of tetrachloroethene (PCE) at several sampling locations across the site. DEH accepts the Report.

The Report also states “Both SVE wells (SVE-01 and SVE-02) will continue to operate with the system running.

A second rebound test is planned for later this year in anticipation that the results will show the PCE mass remaining in the ground is no longer a significant threat to human health or the environment.” The DEH requires written notification of when the SVE system will be shutdown to initiate a second rebound test. Please note that in order to adequately demonstrate that soil vapor concentrations have reached equilibrium, the SVE rebound monitoring period shall last a minimum of six months after SVE shutdown with a minimum of three soil vapor sampling events during the rebound monitoring period. 2096
CC 12-16-2025
2096 of 2165
One-Hour Dry Cleaners
October 20, 2025

Page 2 of 3 ends

REQUIRED SUBMITTALS
You are required to submit the following documents to DEH (Attention: Mr. Aaron Costa) via GeoTracker according to the following schedule.
3Q25 SVE Progress Report – October 31, 2025
Notification of SVE System Shutdown for Rebound Testing – Prior to SVE System Shutdown Technical reports are required pursuant to our authority under Section 101480 of the California Health and Safety Code. Each report shall include conclusions and recommendations for the next phases of work required to protect water resources, human health and safety, and the environment at the site. All required work shall be performed in a prompt and timely manner. Revisions to the schedule shall be requested at least two (2) weeks prior to the due date in writing with appropriate justification for the anticipated delays and a proposed revised schedule.

The California Business and Professions Codes (Sections 6735,7835, and 7835.1) require work plans and technical or implementation reports containing geologic or engineering evaluations and/or judgments must be performed under the direction of an appropriately registered or certified professional.

PERJURY STATEMENT
All proposals and reports submitted to this office must be accompanied by a cover letter from the Responsible Party which states, at a minimum, the following:
"I declare, under penalty of perjury, that the information and/or recommendations contained in the attached proposal or report is true and correct to the best of my knowledge." This letter must be signed by an officer or legally authorized representative of the Responsible Party. In the future, reports that are either missing perjury statements, or include perjury statements that are not signed by a legally authorized representative of the Responsible Party, will be denied by DEH.

ELECTRONIC DATA SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
You are required to electronically submit any report and data required by a regulatory agency for a cleanup site in accordance with the Electronic Reporting Regulations (Chapter 30, Division 3 of Title 23 & Division 3 of Title 27, CCR). You are required to complete electronic data submittal over the Internet to the case file established for the subject site in the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker database. Once a report and data are successfully uploaded, as required, you have met the reporting requirement (i.e., the compliance measure for electronic data submittal are the actual uploads themselves).

For additional details, please visit the following GeoTracker Reporting Requirements webpage:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/ust/electronic_submittal/report_rqmts.html. 2097
CC 12-16-2025
2097 of 2165
One-Hour Dry Cleaners
October 20, 2025

Page 3 of 3 ends

If you have any questions, please contact me at (408) 918-1954 or via email.

Sincerely,
Aaron Costa
Supervising Hazardous Materials Specialist
Site Cleanup Program
[email protected]
cc: Jeff Lawson, Silicon Valley Law Group, [email protected] Jeff Raines, Terraphase Engineering, [email protected] Gian Paolo Martire, City of Cupertino Planning, [email protected] File – GeoTracker
2098
CC 12-16-2025
2098 of 2165
From: Peggy Griffin
To: City of Cupertino Planning Commission; Gian Martire Cc: City Clerk
Subject: 2025-11-12 Planning Commission Meeting-ITEM 2 United Furniture Project - NO Tentative Map to review Date: Tuesday, November 11, 2025 2:40:00 PM
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.

PLEASE INCLUDE THIS EMAIL AS PART OF WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE ABOVE MEETING ITEM.

Dear Planning Commission and Staff,
I understand that there are recent laws preventing the posting copyrighted project documents BUT part of what the Planning Commission is being asked to review and approve is Attachment 4 - Tentative Final Map.

ISSUE1: Attachment 4 has no map!
REQUEST: If this is a document that is protected, the staff can obtain permission from the applicant to provide this map. Please do so to help the review process. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin
2099
CC 12-16-2025
2099 of 2165
From: Peggy Griffin
To: City of Cupertino Planning Commission; Gian Martire Cc: City Clerk
Subject: 2025-11-12 Planning Commission Meeting - ITEM 2 United Furniture Project Date: Tuesday, November 11, 2025 2:58:15 PM
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.

PLEASE INCLUDE THIS EMAIL AS PART OF WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE ABOVE MEETING ITEM.

Dear Planning Commission and Staff,
On the United Furniture project site there was a dry cleaners that leaked and caused contamination. The status of this contamination is still OPEN IN REMEDIATION so it has not corrected the problem. The Staff Report does not mention anything regarding this issue with the land or the planned mitigation.

REQUEST: Please postpone approval until the mitigation has been completed.

Below is the detailed information regarding this site. I have also attached a picture of the map showing the location of both the dry cleaners and the 3 LUST sites.

ONE-HOUR DRY CLEANERS
10045 East Estates Dr.

Cupertino, CA 95014
GeoTracker #T10000021095
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?global_id=T10000021095 Also note, right next to this United Furniture project are 3 LUST sites.

Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin
2100
CC 12-16-2025
2100 of 2165
From: Griffin
To: City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: 2025-11-12 Planning Commission Meeting-ITEM 2 United Furniture…11” setback??? Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2025 10:23:06 AM
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.

PLEASE INCLUDE THIS EMAIL AND ITS ATTACHMENT AS PART OF WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE ABOVE AGENDA ITEM.

Dear Gian and Planning Commission,
On page 2 of the Staff Report it states that the rear setback proposed is 11 inches! Q: Is this a typo? If so, what is the correct setback proposed? Attached is a screenshot of page 2.

Thank you,
Peggy Griffin
2101
CC 12-16-2025
2101 of 2165
2102
CC 12-16-2025
2102 of 2165
From: Anne Ezzat
To: City of Cupertino Planning Commission; City Clerk
Subject: United Furniture Housing Site
Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2025 10:19:41 AM
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 Chairman Rao, Vice Chair Kosolcharoen, Commisorer Fun, Commissioner Lindskog, and Commissioner Schart,
I noticed that the United Furniture housing site is on the agenda for approval and am concerned about this site. As you know, the site housed a dry cleaning facility and chemicals from dry cleaning can be extremely toxic. One chemical in particular can cause heart damage to a fetus if the mother is exposed to the chemical during the earliest stage of pregnancy.

While I think the idea of townhouses is lovely, it should not come at the expense of future residents' health. Please ensure the project is remediated before granting approval.

Thank you and best regards,
Brooke Ezzat
2103
CC 12-16-2025
2103 of 2165
From: Mahesh Gurikar
To: City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Subject: Toll Brothers Project on Stevens Creek Blvd
Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2025 12:30:18 PM
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 planning commission members,
The new project by Toll brothers at Stevens creek blvd and east estates Dr needs to be subject to CEQA requirements. Please do not put future residents of this development at risk of exposure to residual chemicals from existing business.

Also, please make sure Traffic and Parking issues are addressed before you approve this project.

Thank you,
Mahesh Gurikar
2104
CC 12-16-2025
2104 of 2165
From: James Lloyd
To: [email protected]; City of Cupertino Planning Commission; Santosh Rao; Tracy Kosolcharoen; David Fung; Seema Lindskog; Steven Scharf
Cc: Piu Ghosh (she/her); City Attorney"s Office; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk Subject: public comment re item 2 for tonight"s Planning Commission meeting Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2025 1:36:34 PM
Attachments: Cupertino - 10075 E. Estates & 19610 Stevens Creek Blvd - HAA letter.pdf 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 Cupertino Planning Commission,
The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits the attached public comment regarding item 2 for tonight's Planning Commission meeting, the proposed 55-unit housing development project at 10075 E. Estates & 19610 Stevens Creek Blvd, which includes 6 median-income units and 5 moderate-income units.

Sincerely,
James M. Lloyd
Director of Planning and Investigations
California Housing Defense Fund
[email protected]
CalHDF is grant & donation funded
Donate today - https://calhdf.org/donate/
2105
CC 12-16-2025
2105 of 2165
Nov 12, 2025
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Re: Proposed Housing Development at 10075 E. Estates & 19610 Stevens Creek Blvd.

By email: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
CC: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
Dear Cupertino Planning Commission,
The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits this letter to remind the City of its obligation to abide by all relevant state laws when evaluating the proposed 55-unit housing development project at 10075 E. Estates & 19610 Stevens Creek Blvd, which includes 6 median-income units and 5 moderate-income units. These laws include the Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”), the Density Bonus Law (“DBL”), Housing Element Law, AB 130, and California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) guidelines.

The HAA provides the project legal protections. It requires approval of zoning and general plan compliant housing development projects unless findings can be made regarding specific, objective, written health and safety hazards. (Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subds. (j).) The HAA also bars cities from imposing conditions on the approval of such projects that would reduce the project’s density unless, again, such written findings are made. (Ibid.) As a development with at least two-thirds of its area devoted to residential uses, the project falls within the HAA’s ambit, and it complies with local zoning code and the City’s general plan.

Increased density, concessions, and waivers that a project is entitled to under the DBL (Gov.

Code, § 65915) do not render the project noncompliant with the zoning code or general plan, for purposes of the HAA (Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subd. (j)(3)). The HAA’s protections therefore apply, and the City may not reject the project except based on health and safety standards, as outlined above. Furthermore, if the City rejects the project or impairs its feasibility, it must conduct “a thorough analysis of the economic, social, and environmental effects of the action.” (Id. at subd. (b).)
2201 Broadway, PH1, Oakland, CA 94612
www.calhdf.org
2106
CC 12-16-2025
2106 of 2165
CalHDF also writes to emphasize that the DBL offers the proposed development certain protections. The City must respect these protections. In addition to granting the increase in residential units allowed by the DBL, the City must not deny the project the proposed waivers and concessions with respect to side and rear setbacks, building forms, lot coverage, retail requirements, mixed-use requirements, and common area design. If the City wishes to deny requested waivers, Government Code section 65915, subdivision (e)(1) requires findings that the waivers would have a specific, adverse impact upon health or safety, and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact. If the City wishes to deny requested concessions, Government Code section 65915, subdivision (d)(1) requires findings that the concessions would not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, that the concessions would have a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety, or that the concessions are contrary to state or federal law. The City, if it makes any such findings, bears the burden of proof. (Gov. Code, § 65915, subd. (d)(4).) Of note, the DBL specifically allows for a reduction in required accessory parking in addition to the allowable waivers and concessions. (Id. at subd. (p).) Additionally, the California Court of Appeal has ruled that when an applicant has requested one or more waivers and/or concessions pursuant to the DBL, the City “may not apply any development standard that would physically preclude construction of that project as designed, even if the building includes ‘amenities’ beyond the bare minimum of building components.” (Bankers Hill 150 v. City of San Diego (2022) 74 Cal.App.5th 755, 775.)
CalHDF would like to remind the City of its responsibilities under the “no net loss” provisions of the Housing Element Law. Government Code 65863, subdivision (c)(2):

If the approval of a development project results in fewer units by income category than identified in the jurisdiction’s housing element for that parcel and the jurisdiction does not find that the remaining sites in the housing element are adequate to accommodate the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need by income level, the jurisdiction shall within 180 days identify and make available additional adequate sites to accommodate the jurisdiction’s share of the regional housing need by income level. Nothing in this section shall authorize a city, county, or city and county to disapprove a housing development project on the basis that approval of the housing project would require compliance with this paragraph. (Emphasis added.) The Housing Element Law does not allow the City to disapprove the project based on the “no net loss” issues identified in the staff report. Rather, the City must within 180 days make available additional sites to accommodate the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation.

Finally, the project is exempt from state environmental review under the Class 32 CEQA categorical exemption (In-Fill Development Projects) pursuant to section 15332 of the CEQA 2 of 3
2107
CC 12-16-2025
2107 of 2165
Guidelines, as the project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as the applicable zoning designation and regulations; the proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses; the project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species; approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and the site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. The project is also likely eligible for a statutory exemption from CEQA pursuant to AB 130 (Pub. Res. Code, § 21080.66), which was signed into law on June 30, 2025 and effective immediately (Assembly Bill No. 130, 2025-2026 Regular Session, Sec. 74, available here). Caselaw from the California Court of Appeal affirms that local governments err, and may be sued, when they improperly refuse to grant a project a CEQA exemption or streamlined CEQA review to which it is entitled. (Hilltop Group, Inc. v. County of San Diego (2024) 99 Cal.App.5th 890, 911.) As you are well aware, California remains in the throes of a statewide crisis-level housing shortage. New housing such as this is a public benefit: by providing affordable housing, it will mitigate the state’s homelessness crisis; it will increase the city’s tax base; it will bring new customers to local businesses; and it will reduce displacement of existing residents by reducing competition for existing housing. It will also help cut down on transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions by providing housing in denser, more urban areas, as opposed to farther-flung regions in the state (and out of state). While no one project will solve the statewide housing crisis, the proposed development is a step in the right direction. CalHDF urges the City to approve it, consistent with its obligations under state law.

CalHDF is a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation whose mission includes advocating for increased access to housing for Californians at all income levels, including low-income households. You may learn more about CalHDF at www.calhdf.org.

Sincerely,
Dylan Casey
CalHDF Executive Director
James M. Lloyd
CalHDF Director of Planning and Investigations
3 of 3
2108
CC 12-16-2025
2108 of 2165
From: Jennifer Griffin
To: City of Cupertino Planning Commission; City Clerk
Cc: [email protected]; City Council
Subject: United Furniture Site at East Estates & Stevens Creek Blvd.

Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2025 1:38:43 PM
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 Planning Commission:
(Please consider the following comments as public input for Item Number 2 on the Cupertino Planning Commission agenda for 11/12/25).

The proposed housing complex at the United Furniture site is being heard at the Planning Commission Meeting as Item Number 2 on November 12, 2025. I have a few comments about the proposed project.

1. There were no outreach meetings about this project to the public. This is a high visibility project As it concerns the Wolfe/Miller Corridor and Stevens Creek Blvd. It is also directly across the street From The Rise/Vallco which has been a major point of concern over the years for the adjacent neighborhoods.

2. I am very happy there has been serious attempts to honor the Stevens Creek Blvd. Heart of the City Plans as the project fronts along a major section of Stevens Creek Blvd. HOC was established to provide and retain a certain green, leafy look and feel to Stevens Creek Blvd. and it is indeed a refreshing site to behold as you enter the city from areas where there might be no trees or greenery.

Wolfe/Miller is a major north/south travel corridor from other places and people travel through this Area as they continue to other cities. It is important to maintain this green tranquil corridor and I feel the proposed project had tried to do this. Green and leafy and green setbacks is much the Codeword for HOC.

3. I am very glad that there are at least two parking spaces for each of the 55 proposed housing units.

These are large living units and they will have families or possibly three to four individuals per unit. There needs to be adequate room to have several cars per unit. The selling price point of these units justify this as well as practicality. If you have a three to four bedroom housing unit, there will Be at least two to three cars per unit. I am concerned that there will not be enough visitor parking.

I think there are only eight extra parking spaces. These will be quickly taken up and you don't Want the overflow parking in the neighborhoods or at the adjacent shopping centers. I think It would be nice to have at least 15 extra parking spaces. There are problems with parking at Westport by Mary Avenue and Stevens Creek Blvd. One hopes that parking will not be a problem at the United Furniture site.

4. I am confused about the adus being part of this project. There are nine adus being proposed for this project. I am assuming the adus belong to a town house? Are the adus sold with the townhouse? Do the adus have kitchens? Who will live in them? Do the townhouse owners rent them out for extra income? Will the townhouses with adus sell for more money? What about the affordable townhouses with adus? They are supposed to sell to income restricted individuals or families with Lower incomes. If there is an adu as part of this affordable townhouse, what happens to the adu? Does the low income owner get to rent the adu out and will the adu be under rent control too? The townhouse owner in the income restricted units should not be able to rent the adu out at market rate. The city needs to watch how these adus are handled. The adus should only be rented To low income people and not become Airbnbs. There should be monitoring of this.

Also, will the adus have parking spaces? The eight extra visitor parking spaces mentioned above Should not be just for the adus. There needs to be more parking on site. 2109
CC 12-16-2025
2109 of 2165

5. What is the proposed number of children from this complex and how will that affect adjacent Schools? What schools will these children attend? Will they have to cross Stevens Creek Blvd.?

6. I am very concerned about the overwhelming loss of retail in Cupertino, especially along Stevens Creek Blvd. I am worried about the city becoming a food desert and a shopping desert.

I wish this project had retail in it.

7. I hope the United Furniture project will not create a traffic flow problem on Stevens Creek Blvd., especially by the entrance to Stevens Creek from East Estates and by the gas station. It is already very congested at this area and the adjacent intersections now.

8. Please use harmonious colors on this housing unit complex. Red and bright yellow are not Good choices for this area. Subdued and elegant are always much appreciated.

Thank you to everyone for trying to make this project a success and a very classy and beautiful Addition to our precious Cupertino.

Thank you.

Best regards,
Jennifer Griffin
Cupertino Resident
2110
CC 12-16-2025
2110 of 2165
From: Jennifer Griffin
To: City Clerk
Cc: [email protected]; City of Cupertino Planning Commission; City Council Subject: Fwd: United Furniture Site at East Estates & Stevens Creek Blvd.

Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2025 1:41:14 PM
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 following as public comments for Item Number 2 on the Cupertino Planning Commission Agenda for the 11/12/25 meeting. Thank you.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: United Furniture Site at East Estates & Stevens Creek Blvd.

From: Jennifer Griffin <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2025, 1:38 PM
To: [email protected],[email protected] CC: [email protected],[email protected]
Dear Planning Commission:
(Please consider the following comments as public input for Item Number 2 on the Cupertino Planning Commission agenda for 11/12/25).

The proposed housing complex at the United Furniture site is being heard at the Planning Commission
Meeting as Item Number 2 on November 12, 2025. I have a few comments about the proposed project.

1. There were no outreach meetings about this project to the public. This is a high visibility project
As it concerns the Wolfe/Miller Corridor and Stevens Creek Blvd. It is also directly across the street
From The Rise/Vallco which has been a major point of concern over the years for the adjacent neighborhoods.

2. I am very happy there has been serious attempts to honor the Stevens Creek Blvd. Heart of the
City Plans as the project fronts along a major section of Stevens Creek Blvd. HOC was established to
provide and retain a certain green, leafy look and feel to Stevens Creek Blvd. and it is indeed a 2111
CC 12-16-2025
2111 of 2165
refreshing site to behold as you enter the city from areas where there might be no trees or greenery.

Wolfe/Miller is a major north/south travel corridor from other places and people travel through this
Area as they continue to other cities. It is important to maintain this green tranquil corridor and
I feel the proposed project had tried to do this. Green and leafy and green setbacks is much the Codeword for HOC.

3. I am very glad that there are at least two parking spaces for each of the 55 proposed housing units.

These are large living units and they will have families or possibly three to four individuals per
unit. There needs to be adequate room to have several cars per unit. The selling price point of these
units justify this as well as practicality. If you have a three to four bedroom housing unit, there will
Be at least two to three cars per unit. I am concerned that there will not be enough visitor parking.

4. I am confused about the adus being part of this project. There are nine adus being proposed for
this project. I am assuming the adus belong to a town house? Are the adus sold with the townhouse?
Do the adus have kitchens? Who will live in them? Do the townhouse owners rent them out for
extra income? Will the townhouses with adus sell for more money? What about the affordable townhouses with adus? They are supposed to sell to income restricted individuals or families with
Lower incomes. If there is an adu as part of this affordable townhouse, what happens to the adu?
Does the low income owner get to rent the adu out and will the adu be under rent control too? The townhouse owner in the income restricted units should not be able to rent the adu out at market rate. The city needs to watch how these adus are handled. The adus should only be rented
To low income people and not become Airbnbs. There should be monitoring of this.

Also, will the adus have parking spaces? The eight extra visitor parking spaces mentioned above
Should not be just for the adus. There needs to be more parking on site.

5. What is the proposed number of children from this complex and how will that affect adjacent
Schools? What schools will these children attend? Will they have to cross Stevens Creek 2112
CC 12-16-2025
2112 of 2165
Blvd.?

6. I am very concerned about the overwhelming loss of retail in Cupertino, especially along Stevens Creek Blvd. I am worried about the city becoming a food desert and a shopping desert.

I wish this project had retail in it.

7. I hope the United Furniture project will not create a traffic flow problem on Stevens Creek Blvd.,
especially by the entrance to Stevens Creek from East Estates and by the gas station. It is already
very congested at this area and the adjacent intersections now.

8. Please use harmonious colors on this housing unit complex. Red and bright yellow are not Good choices for this area. Subdued and elegant are always much appreciated.

Thank you to everyone for trying to make this project a success and a very classy and beautiful
Addition to our precious Cupertino.

Thank you.

Best regards,
Jennifer Griffin
Cupertino Resident
2113
CC 12-16-2025
2113 of 2165
From: Rhoda Fry
To: City of Cupertino Planning Commission; City of Cupertino Planning Dept.

Cc: City Council
Subject: Comments for 11/12/2025 Meeting regarding E Estates Date: Wednesday, November 12, 2025 3:11:56 PM
Attachments: 20230615_101480_RAA_Notification_One-Hour_Dry_Cleaners.pdf 20251020_Revised SVE Progress Report_2023-17s.pdf
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 Planning Commissioners,
I am beyond shocked that the City is considering to agree to a categorical CEQA exemption for this project given that the hazmat clean-up for this site is incomplete. In my opinion, this puts our City at legal risk and certainly puts our residents at health risk. You can find all of the documents and studies pertaining to this property at this link on GeoTracker. Please do not consider this project to be CEQA exempt. There are many documents that you can peruse here:
https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/profile_report.asp?global_id=T10000021095 I have attached a couple of documents related to the site. The first attachment appears to be the oldest document on the site where the property owner is well-aware of the issues. The second attachment appears to be the newest document on the site, dated October 20, 2025, where the County Department of Environmental Health is in disagreement with the findings of the developer’s subcontractors.

Furthermore, because of a history of hazmat, this project is by default on the Cortese list, which, to my knowledge, restricts CEQA exemptions.

Furthermore, Cupertino is becoming less walkable. I am disappointed by the lack of proposed retail. At that site, there had been a supermarket and later a fabric store. I loved to walk there when I moved to Cupertino and lived on Miller nearby. In fact, for the first year and a half that I lived in Cupertino, I did not have a car. Similarly, my own neighborhood in Monta Vista, there had been a Supermarket and a Hardware Store and later a green grocer. Now all gone.

Having retail is important for our sales-tax base – for every $100 spent on taxable goods, Cupertino receives $1. And it is important for property values and property-tax-revenue to the City. And most importantly, it is vital for quality-of-life. Isn’t that why we chose to live in Cupertino?
Thanks Much,
Rhoda Fry
2114
CC 12-16-2025
2114 of 2165
County of Santa Clara
Department of Environmental Health
Hazardous Materials Compliance Division
Site Mitigation Program
1555 Berger Drive, Suite 300
San Jose, CA 95112-2716
(408) 918-3400 FAX (408) 280-6479
Board of Supervisors: Sylvia Arenas, Cindy Chavez, Otto Lee, Susan Ellenberg, S. Joseph Simitian County Executive: Jeffrey V. Smith
Date: SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL ONLY
Nicole Yuen John Wolfenden
Department of Toxic Substances Control Regional Water Quality Control Board Berkeley Regional Office San Francisco Bay
[email protected] [email protected] Notification of Intent to Enter into a Remedial Action Agreement Required by CA Health & Safety Code, Sections 101480 & 101487 Section I: Local Agency Information
Name: County of Santa Clara, Department of Environmental Health (DEH) Address: 1555 Berger Drive, Suite 300, San Jose CA 95112 Local Officer: Dr. Marilyn Underwood, Director, Department of Environmental Health [email protected]
408-918-1976
Section II: General Site Information
Site Information
Site Name: One-Hour Dry Cleaners GeoTracker ID: T10000021095 Local Case Number: TBD APN: 369-06-002
Site Address: 10045 East Estates Drive, Cupertino, CA 95014 Responsible Party or Project Proponent Information
Name: Idlewild TIC
Primary Contact: Victor M. Castello
Email: [email protected] Phone: (408) 450-4816
Address: PO Box 254, Saratoga, CA 95071
Property Owner Information (if different from Responsible Party) Joseph Nacy Castello, an individual; Rosalie Castello Flores, an individual; Tamara M. Foglesong, an individual; Jennifer Castello, an individual; Rick Costello II, an individual; Victor M. Castello, an individual; Gina C. Wagner, an individual; Geno I. Castello, an individual; Victoria M. Castello, an individual; Rosalyn J. Castello, an individual; Trust for Dana E. Clover under the 1996 Grace M. Clover Living Trust U/D/T November 5, 1996; Ryan Andersen, as successor trustee of the Trust for Dana E. Clover under the 1996 Grace M. Clover Living Trust U/D/T November 5, 1996; Cara Clover Borromei, an individual; Danica Cavigliano, an individual; and Nicolas Cavigliano, an individual (collectively referred to as “Idlewild Tenants in Common [TIC]”).

Primary Contact: Victor M. Castello
Email: [email protected] Phone: (408) 450-4816
Address on file with Assessor: 2323 Gunar Drive, San Jose, CA 95124 DocuSign Envelope ID: 12898908-07CD-4C2E-B21C-7B080560D9EE 6/15/2023
2115
CC 12-16-2025
2115 of 2165
One-Hour Dry Cleaners

Page 2 of 3 ends

Section III: Agency Involvement & Background
DEH is not aware of any planned local, state, or federal regulatory involvement at the waste release site beyond the scope of work described in this notice. A review of EnviroStor and GeoTracker identified open cases located within approximately 500 feet of the waste release site, as listed below.

Site Name ID Number Site Address Lead Agency
Vallco Town Center T10000017167 10123 North Wolfe Road DEH 19720 Stevens Creek Blvd T10000016970 19720 Stevens Creek Blvd DEH Contamination associated with the above case(s) may be affecting the waste release site.

Section IV: Operational and Release Information
Land-use (past, current, and planned, if known):

Currently commercial use with previous dry cleaner tenant. Historical and future use unknown but likely extends off site.

Type of Contamination:
☒Petroleum ☐PFAS/PFOAs ☐Pesticides ☒Chlorinated Solvents ☐PCBs ☐Metals ☐Dioxins/Furans ☐Semi-Volatiles (e.g., PAHs) ☒Unknown ☐Other:

Maximum Concentrations Detected (if known): Soil and groundwater conditions are unknown. Applicant has provided preliminary information identifying a maximum concentration of tetrachloroethene (PCE) in soil gas at 30,000 micrograms per cubic meter. Indoor air concentrations of PCE and benzene were also reported, with the indoor air concentration of benzene reportedly exceeding indoor air screening criteria.

The nature and extent of contamination is unknown.

Extent of Contamination:
☐Limited to Source Property ☐Extends Beyond Source Property ☒Unknown Threatened Receptors:
☐Water Well ☐Surface Waters ☐Residence ☐School/Daycare ☒Unknown ☐Other:

Section V: Planned Investigation and Remediation
Anticipated Investigation Type:
☒Groundwater ☒Soil ☒Soil Vapor ☐ Surface Water ☐ Air
The planned oversight by DEH is to direct additional investigations, if needed, in order to complete the conceptual site model (CSM) and understand potential risk(s) to on-site and off-site receptors. Interim remedial actions may be required to protect human health. Once the CSM is better understood, DEH will direct the development and implementation of a site management plan and/or remedial action plan or similar document, including cleanup goals, as well as any long-term mitigation measure(s) needed to protect human health and the environment.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 12898908-07CD-4C2E-B21C-7B080560D9EE 2116
CC 12-16-2025
2116 of 2165
One-Hour Dry Cleaners

Page 3 of 3 ends

Section VI: Local Officer Acknowledgement
I, Marilyn Underwood, acknowledge the following statements:

1. The information in this notification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge.

2. DEH has the technical expertise and staff resources available to provide regulatory oversight for the waste release site identified in this notification. Information supporting this statement has been submitted to the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board) within the past 12 months, as required by Health and Safety Code, Section 101480(b)(2).

Please inform DEH whether DTSC or the Regional Water Board will retain oversight authority for the waste release site. The attached form has been provided to assist you. If DEH receives no response within 30 days of the date of this notice, DEH will proceed with entering into a Remedial Action Agreement pursuant to Health and Safety Code, Section 101480(f)(2).

If you need any additional information about this project, please contact Senior Hazardous Materials Specialist Travis Flora at (408) 918-3486 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
Marilyn C. Underwood, PhD
Director, Department of Environmental Health
Attachments: DTSC Determination of Regulatory Oversight Regional Water Board Determination of Regulatory Oversight cc: Marikka Hughes, Department of Toxic Substances Control, Site Mitigation Program ([email protected])

Steven McMasters, State Water Resources Control Board, Division of Water Quality ([email protected])
DocuSign Envelope ID: 12898908-07CD-4C2E-B21C-7B080560D9EE 2117
CC 12-16-2025
2117 of 2165
DTSC Determination of Regulatory Oversight
The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) may use this attachment to inform DEH whether they will retain oversight authority for the waste release site described below. If DEH receives no response within 30 days of the date of this notice, DEH will proceed with entering into a Remedial Action Agreement pursuant to Health and Safety Code, Section 101480(f)(2).

Site Information
Site Name: One-Hour Dry Cleaners GeoTracker ID: T10000021095 Local Case Number: TBD APN: 369-06-002
Site Address: 10045 East Estates Drive, Cupertino, CA 95014 DTSC Determination
☐ DTSC will not retain oversight authority for the waste release site. ☐ DTSC will retain oversight authority for the waste release site.

Please provide the following information only if retaining oversight authority for the waste release site.

Reason for retaining oversight authority:

If retaining oversight authority, the DTSC will post public records regarding the waste release site on the following website:
☐ www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov ☐ Other:

This determination was made by:

Name:

Phone:

Email:

Signature: Date:

DocuSign Envelope ID: 12898908-07CD-4C2E-B21C-7B080560D9EE Nicole Yuen
[email protected]
6/15/2023
X
2118
CC 12-16-2025
2118 of 2165
Regional Water Board Determination of Regulatory Oversight The Regional Water Board may use this attachment to inform DEH whether they will retain oversight authority for the waste release site described below. If DEH receives no response within 30 days of the date of this notice, DEH will proceed with entering into a Remedial Action Agreement pursuant to Health and Safety Code, Section 101480(f)(2).

Site Information
Site Name: One-Hour Dry Cleaners GeoTracker ID: T10000021095 Local Case Number: TBD APN: 369-06-002
Site Address: 10045 East Estates Drive, Cupertino, CA 95014 Regional Water Board Determination
☐ Regional Water Board will not retain oversight authority for the waste release site. ☐ Regional Water Board will retain oversight authority for the waste release site.

Please provide the following information only if retaining oversight authority for the waste release site.

Reason for retaining oversight authority:

If retaining oversight authority, the Regional Water Board will post public records regarding the waste release site on the following website:
☐ www.geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov ☐ Other:

This determination was made by:

Name:

Phone:

Email:

Signature: Date:

DocuSign Envelope ID: 12898908-07CD-4C2E-B21C-7B080560D9EE X
6/15/2023
John Wolfenden
5106222444
[email protected]
2119
CC 12-16-2025
2119 of 2165
County of Santa Clara Department of Environmental Health Hazardous Materials Compliance Division
1555 Berger Drive, Suite 300
San José, CA 95112-2716
(408) 918-3400
www.ehinfo.org/hazmat
Board of Supervisors: Sylvia Arenas, Betty Duong, Otto Lee, Susan Ellenberg, Margaret Abe-Koga County Executive: James R. Williams
October 20, 2025

The Report documents operational parameters of the SVE system and soil vapor concentrations of tetrachloroethene (PCE) at several sampling locations across the site. DEH accepts the Report.

The Report also states “Both SVE wells (SVE-01 and SVE-02) will continue to operate with the system running.

A second rebound test is planned for later this year in anticipation that the results will show the PCE mass remaining in the ground is no longer a significant threat to human health or the environment.” The DEH requires written notification of when the SVE system will be shutdown to initiate a second rebound test. Please note that in order to adequately demonstrate that soil vapor concentrations have reached equilibrium, the SVE rebound monitoring period shall last a minimum of six months after SVE shutdown with a minimum of three soil vapor sampling events during the rebound monitoring period. 2120
CC 12-16-2025
2120 of 2165
One-Hour Dry Cleaners
October 20, 2025

Page 2 of 3 ends

For additional details, please visit the following GeoTracker Reporting Requirements webpage:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/ust/electronic_submittal/report_rqmts.html. 2121
CC 12-16-2025
2121 of 2165
One-Hour Dry Cleaners
October 20, 2025

Page 3 of 3 ends

If you have any questions, please contact me at (408) 918-1954 or via email.

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
25-14271 Agenda Date:
12/16/2025 Agenda #:

11. Subject: Determine City Hall Improvements project scope and resources, approve budget modification in the amount of $54,000,000 and authorize design-build delivery methods.

For the Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) City Hall Improvements project (Project),

1. Approve the proposed scope of the Project:
a. Risk Category IV Renovation of Structural System
b. Maintain Current Footprint: Reconfigure Interior, no vertical or horizontal expansion c. No Parking Expansion
d. Upgrades to Infrastructure and Accessibility

2. Adopt Resolution No. 25-110 approving Budget Modification No. 2425-425, increasing appropriations by $54,000,000 in the Capital Improvement Fund for the Project (420-99-250);

3. Authorize the City Manager to undertake a design-build project delivery method for the Project;

4. Adopt Resolution No. 25-111 approving the procurement of a design-build contract for the Project.

CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 12/10/2025
powered by Legistar™2126
CC 12-16-2025
2126 of 2165

PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-5732
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3354 • FAX: (408) 777-3333
CUPERTINO.GOV

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Date: December 16, 2025
Subject
Determine City Hall Improvements project scope and resources, approve budget modification in the amount of $54,000,000 and authorize design-build delivery methods.

Recommended Action
For the Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) City Hall Improvements project (Project),

1. Approve the proposed scope of the Project:
a. Risk Category IV Renovation of Structural System
b. Maintain Current Footprint: Reconfigure Interior, no vertical or horizontal expansion
c. No Parking Expansion
d. Upgrades to Infrastructure and Accessibility

2. Adopt Resolution No. 25-XXX approving Budget Modification No. 2425-425, increasing appropriations by $54,000,000 in the Capital Improvement Fund for the Project (420-99- 250);

3. Authorize the City Manager to undertake a design-build project delivery method for the Project;

4. Adopt Resolution No. 25-XXX approving the procurement of a design-build contract for the Project.

Executive Summary
Since 2011, the City Council has considered multiple options to address the aging and seismically deficient City Hall facility. Following prior direction to pursue a comprehensive renovation in 2022, subsequent exploration of a new facility in 2023, and inclusion of City Hall Improvements renovation project (Project) in the FY 2025–2027 City Work Program, staff is requesting Council to confirm Project direction, review updated cost and implementation information, and allocate financial and staff resources for the Project. This report provides an overview of the design-build process, the advantages of undertaking this method, and an outline of the next steps.
2127
CC 12-16-2025
2127 of 2165

Page 2 of 12 ends

Background
Since 2011, the City Council has held numerous discussions regarding the long-term future of the existing City Hall facility. The current facility, originally constructed in 1965 and renovated in 1986, did not receive seismic upgrades consistent with the 1985 Uniform Building Code during its renovation. This deficiency was discovered in 2005. Subsequent structural analyses conducted in 2011, 2012, 2014, and 2021 identified significant seismic deficiencies, and these findings were presented to the City Council.

The 2012 Civic Center Master Plan, along with the 2018 and 2022 Facility Condition Assessment reports, further concluded that much of the building’s mechanical, electrical, and plumbing infrastructure—as well as its fire, life-safety, and technology systems—have exceeded their useful service life. In addition, insufficient space and parking for both employees and members of the public remain persistent challenges.

Since 2005, the City has initiated several efforts to address the condition and functionality of the existing City Hall; however, these initiatives have not advanced to implementation. The four most recent Council actions are summarized below.

A. November 2022 – Direction on City Hall Renovation
In March 2021, the City acquired the property located at 10455 Torre Avenue (City Hall Annex) to serve as a customer-facing facility during City Hall Improvement project work and to accommodate potential future programmatic needs. On October 18, 2022, the Council amended the City Hall Annex project scope to include programming, design, and construction of the building as the City’s Permit Center and Emergency Operations Center (EOC). The City Hall Annex renovation project is currently underway.

On November 15, 2022, following recommendations from the Council Subcommittee on City Hall, the City Council directed staff to proceed with a renovation of the City Hall Improvements Project at a Risk Category IV level, representing a higher standard of seismic reinforcement than that required for a typical office building. The approved project scope included a comprehensive seismic retrofit, full replacement of core infrastructure systems, and complete interior rehabilitation of the existing facility. The estimated design and construction cost was projected at $27.5 million, exclusive of additional owner-related expenses such as hazardous materials remediation, testing and inspections, and interim staff relocation.

B. February 2023 – Direction to Explore a New Facility
On February 21, 2023, the City Council directed staff to suspend all work related to the City Hall Improvement project. The Council further instructed staff to explore options for the construction of a new City Hall facility that could incorporate flexible event and community programming space and to evaluate the potential inclusion of other City-owned properties within this analysis. This action represented a strategic shift from renovation of the existing facility toward the development of a new civic building.

C. March 2025 – FY 2025–2027 City Work Program
In November 2024, the City commenced the FY 2025–2027 City Work Program (CWP) process through the Council’s Goal Setting and Prioritization Workshop. On March 18, 2025, the City 2128
CC 12-16-2025
2128 of 2165

Page 3 of 12 ends

Council approved the final list of priority initiatives for inclusion in the FY 2025–26 adopted budget. Item 13 of the approved CWP—titled “City Hall Retrofit and City Hall Annex Renovation including the EOC”—directs staff to implement the previously approved 2022 Council direction for the City Hall Improvements project, with EOC migration to the City Hall Annex, as referenced in Item A above.

D. April 2025 – FY 2025–2026 Capital Improvement Programs Proposal When the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) was presented in April 2025, the Council provided the following specific direction pertaining to the City Hall and City Hall Annex projects, which informs the current discussion:
• City Hall Annex project to move forward with 100% design • City Hall renovation project to come back in October/November, including financing options, cost-benefit analysis
Within the April 2025 CIP proposal to Council, a very short summary of the options to renovate or reconstruct City Hall was included in the package. It was noted that if Council wishes to activate the City Hall project,
a. Additional funding for design and construction, and additional staffing would be required.
b. Direction on the scope of work would be required (see below).

Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options
The Recommended Actions are organized into three primary categories:

1. Scope, including Costs and Schedule

2. Budget and Staffing Resources

3. Design-Build Process
The sections that follow provide detailed information within each category. Additional options for consideration follows, and the report concludes with a summary of Next Steps.

1. Scope, Costs and Schedule
Council’s direction from the CWP item and subsequent discussions indicates a preference to renovate the existing City Hall facility rather than construct a replacement building. Prior Council direction also identified further scope delineations as outlined in the four points below.

Staff recommendations in this report are based on the direction received from Council in November 2022, and those preferences remain unchanged. The scope, schedule, and financial proposals presented here are aligned with these preferences. At the end of this report, staff has outlined alternate scope and cost options for Council to consider. a. Risk Category IV Renovation of Structural System
The facility will be renovated to meet the standards of an Essential Services facility (Risk Category IV), rather than the lower Risk Category II designation typical for commercial office buildings. Although the City Hall Annex will serve as the City’s Emergency Operations Center (EOC), Council determined in 2022 that upgrading City Hall to Essential Services standards (Risk Category IV) was warranted. The cost differential, approximately $3 million, was 2129
CC 12-16-2025
2129 of 2165

Page 4 of 12 ends

considered reasonable given the community benefit of maintaining a facility capable of operating during emergency events.
b. Maintain Current Footprint: Reconfigure Interior, no vertical or horizontal expansion.

The project will maintain the existing building footprint, without adding new stories or expanding the structure for future occupancy. Instead, the design will focus on interior reconfiguration to maximize the efficient use of space. The existing City Hall encompasses roughly 24,000 square feet across two floors and currently houses approximately 120 employees, with seating capacity for 139.

Staffing growth projections vary, but modest increases in occupancy (15%) can be accommodated with the reconfiguration of the floor plan as proposed. Accordingly, it is reasonable to conclude that the existing building footprint will continue to meet operational needs over the next decade, provided that:
o Staffing levels do not grow beyond 15%.
o The facility continues to provide current service levels.

Illustration: October 2025, City Hall Floor plans
c. No Parking Expansion
Expansion of existing parking facilities is not included in the project scope. Although parking availability at the Civic Center is limited, the project does not trigger additional parking requirements. The building size, footprint, and use will remain unchanged; factors typically used to determine parking ratios.

Parking capacity was last verified as adequate to meet code requirements in 2022. Once the project advances, compliance with updated California Building Code (CBC) requirements will be re-evaluated, including anticipated updates related to accessibility and electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure.
d. Upgrades to Infrastructure and Accessibility
2130
CC 12-16-2025
2130 of 2165

Page 5 of 12 ends

Infrastructure and accessibility upgrades necessary to meet current building codes will be included. Major building systems, including HVAC, IT, and electrical infrastructure, date back to 1965 and have exceeded their expected useful life. While partial repairs have been made over the years, full replacement is now necessary to ensure compliance with current building codes and Title 24 energy standards.

Updated Cost Projections
The Project Cost Estimates shared with City Council in 2022 (Attachment D) accounted for construction and 25% added to account for the “soft” cost of consultants (indicated in the top table, below). It has been noted that the cost estimate did not cover all the expected costs, such as moving, utility hook-ups, hazardous material remediation, etc. In October 2025, the City contracted Cumming Group to update the 2022 construction cost projections and requested that the estimate include all anticipated work efforts necessary to complete the project (indicated in the lower table, below).

Line
#
Comparison of Costs,
using 2022 methodology
("Apples to Apples")
Total, direct
construction
Soft Costs
(add 25%)
2024 Project
(2023 + 5%
escalation)
2025
Project
(2024 + 5%
escalation)
1 2022 Cost Estimate $20,955,693 $5,238,923 $27,504,347 $28,879,564 2 2025 Cost Estimate, direct
comparison (matching
methodology)
$28,973,046 $7,243,262 N.A. $36,216,308
Line
#
2025 Cost Estimate:

Construction + Full
Project Costs
Total, direct
construction
3a Construction: direct
construction costs $28,973,046
3b Construction: 10%
contingency $2,897,305 Note: Lines 3a, 3b and 3c (Construction) subtotal:
3c Construction: Escalation $8,099,063 $39,969,414
3d Soft Costs: Consultants $3,467,998
3e Soft Costs: Other $10,933,627
total: $54,371,039
The updated 2025 lower table estimate consists of two major components:

1. Construction Costs: based on a Design-Build delivery model.

2. Soft Costs: including consultant services, testing and inspections, hazardous materials remediation, permitting, furniture and equipment, interim real estate expenses (lease, buildout, moving), escalation, and contingency allowances. 2131
CC 12-16-2025
2131 of 2165

Page 6 of 12 ends

Construction Costs
The Construction Cost estimate has notable Key Assumptions and Exclusions:

Construction Cost: Key Assumptions
 Design Build Delivery Method
 Construction occurs in one phase.
 Building Unoccupied During Construction
 Interior Building Demolition Included
 Construction Budget Priced in October 2025 Dollars
 The Project Would Initiate Immediately After Approval of Budget Construction Cost: Direct Costs Key Exclusions
 Project Soft Costs
 Interior Furnishing
 Staff and Equipment Relocation
 Audio Visual Equipment
 Hazardous Material Abatement
 Off Hours Premium/Overtime
 Multiple Phase Construction
 Escalation
The total construction cost is estimated at $29 million, equating to approximately $1,223 per square foot. Allowing for a 10% contingency brings the construction cost to roughly $32 million.

Soft Costs and Overall Project Budget
Soft costs are projected to include all City-incurred expenses related to that project delivery that are not included in the construction costs listed above.

Soft Costs: Key Inclusions
 Consultants: Bridging Architect and Engineering team, Construction/Project Management, Cost Management, FF&E consultants, Commissioning agents, Special Inspectors, Public Engagement and Communications
 Design phase Surveying, and testing and analysis (e.g. Geotech, Hazmat, Utilities)  Hazardous Materials Abatement
 Permit fees
 Staff and Equipment Relocation: moving expenses, build-out of temporary spaces, storage
 FF&E: Furniture, Furnishings and Equipment.
 Audio Visual, Telecommunication, Security and Data systems and equipment  Escalation
Details are provided in Attachment C, organized in six-month increments for flexible budgeting.

The total preliminary project budget—including both construction and soft costs—is estimated at approximately $54.4 million, with a current allocation of 74% for construction and 26% for soft costs once “escalation” is included as a construction cost. Construction typically accounts 2132
CC 12-16-2025
2132 of 2165

Page 7 of 12 ends

for a majority share of the overall budget (it usually sits around 65% construction / 35% soft costs). The use of more conservative fiscal assumptions at this early stage provides appropriate contingency and escalation capacity for a project of this duration and complexity.

To support these budget assumptions, the project team has prepared a high-level preliminary schedule. Based on current information, staff anticipate that the overall effort will span approximately five years.

Preliminary Schedule (Dec. 2025)
Description Start Finish Duration
(Weeks)
Bridging Architect: RFP process, execute
contract
12/17/2025 3/27/2026 14
Bridging Architect: Design &
Documentation 3/30/2026 3/26/2027 52
Design-Build Entity: RFQ and RFP,
execute contract
3/29/2027 8/24/2027 26
Design-Build Entity: Design &
Documentation, Permitting 8/27/2027 4/14/2028 33
Design-Build Entity: Submittals &
Procurement 4/17/2028 6/29/2029 63
Design-Build Entity: Construction 7/2/2029 5/24/2030 47 Design-Build Entity: FF&E and Move-In 5/27/2030 7/25/2030 9 City Hall Improvements 12/17/2025 7/25/2030 244

2. Budget and Staffing Resources
Budget
As noted previously, the total projected cost for the Project is approximately $54.5 million.

Attachment C provides a breakdown of anticipated expenditures by calendar and fiscal year.

While contracts (encumbrances) will be executed in the early fiscal years, actual spending will occur throughout the duration of the Project. These projections will support effective financial planning.

FY25-26 FY26-27 FY27-28 FY28-29 FY29-30 totals
Projected
Expenditures
$793,824 $1,329,109 $7,704,743 $22,501,089 $22,042,269 $54,371,034 2133
CC 12-16-2025
2133 of 2165

Page 8 of 12 ends

Projected
Encumbrances
$1,555,777 $3,824,198 $43,973,600 $5,017,464 $ 0 $54,371,034 Staffing
The CIP Division currently includes 4.25 full-time employees (FTEs): a CIP Manager, a Senior Civil Engineer (vacant), two Project Managers (representing 1.25 FTEs), and an Assistant Engineer (vacant). Recruitment efforts for vacant positions are in progress.

The City Hall Improvements project will require the dedicated, full-time involvement of one staff member. Given the Division’s existing workload across multiple active capital projects, staff recommends the addition of one FTE in FY 2026–27 to support this project. This position would be added for the duration of the effort, supplementing the existing 4.25 FTEs.

However, as positions become vacant within the Division near the end of the project, the City will evaluate if filling vacancies is appropriate.

3. Design-Build Process
The Public Contract Code (PCC) allows for an exception to the traditional design-bid-build process if approved by the City Council. The PCC Section 22162(a) states:

Except as provided in subdivision (b), and notwithstanding any other law, a local agency, with approval of its governing body, may procure design-build contracts for public works projects in excess of one million dollars ($1,000,000), awarding the contract to either the low bid or the best value, provided that this article shall not apply to any projects on the state highway system.

The project delivery process proposed for the Project is Design-Build, pursuant to California Public Contract Code section 22160 et seq., instead of conventional design-bid-build project delivery. The procurement method for this design-build project is based on best value rather than low bid. Design-Build delivery involves contracting with a single entity known as the Design-Build Entity (“DBE”) for both design and construction of the project. Using DesignBuild can potentially afford greater integration of services and more flexibility than the conventional design-bid-build and typically reduces project costs and expedites project completion.

The advantages of this method include:
• Time and cost savings: Design-build can save time and costs by having all services delivered by a DBE which reduces overhead and increases communication when compared to other methods, such as design-bid-build.
• Reduced risk: Design-build can reduce risk created by design or construction changes while saving time during design, scope development, and cost estimates when the designer and contractor work closely together. • Simplified project management: A single team manages the entire project, which can reduce claims and promote collaboration between vendors. • Single point of contact: The City of Cupertino will have a single contract and consistent project team for all aspects of the project. 2134
CC 12-16-2025
2134 of 2165

Page 9 of 12 ends

• Flexibility: Design-build process allows for negotiation of fees and services.

Further Options for Consideration
The overall cost of the project is a large responsibility. Council may wish to consider options that allow for varying levels of expenditure. Options presented to Council in 2022 are described in Attachment D. The options below are slightly altered in scope from the 2022 options to reflect building code considerations and Council’s directions since that time.

Option A: Schematic Design only. $2.5 million in FY26-27, $52 million in FY28-29 (+/-) Commit to schematic design only, for the full renovation scope. Design and Construction Management teams will be contracted to more fully explore cost and scope alternatives before commitment to the design-build process.
 Pros: further structural analysis may allow for scope and cost reductions.  Cons: The overall project cost and commitment would be deferred, adding additional time and potential escalation costs to the project.

Option B: Renovation without Tenant Improvements. $46.3 million Reduction of scope to eliminate spatial reconfigurations and interior improvements that are tenant improvements not otherwise required by seismic work, HVAC/infrastructure upgrades and accessibility upgrades required by building codes.

The cost is a rough estimate that would require further substantiation of cost, scope, and schedule by the cost management consultants, if Council wishes to pursue this option.

As previously noted, the magnitude of the cost and scope of the seismic retrofit triggers the building code requirements to make systematic improvements to HVAC (e.g. heating, cooling, and air-conditioning), infrastructure such as electrical systems, and accessibility. Reducing the scope to only include ‘seismic retrofit’ is therefore not possible. This Option B eliminates all discretionary scopes. Since prior Council direction was to move forward with the full renovation scope, the project team has not yet fully explored the cost and scheduling impacts of this option.
 Pros: reduction of overall cost.
 Cons: The current spatial configuration of the facility has large inefficient areas in the lobby and old Council Chambers that would not be reconfigured. Additional Community meeting rooms cannot be added. The current workspace would not be improved.

Option C: Full Renovation. $54.5 million (Recommended Action) Commitment to the full renovation scope and estimated costs.  Pros: clear direction for the project, resulting in an efficient, seismically stable facility that better meets the needs of the Community than the current facility.  Cons: The cost of projections is a large commitment.

Option D: Full Renovation + Surface Parking Expansion. Cost: TBD (anticipated $57 million – needs further evaluation to refine)
2135
CC 12-16-2025
2135 of 2165

Page 10 of 12 ends

Commitment to the full renovation scope and the design and construction of a stand-alone parking garage, to address constricted parking availability at Civic Center.  Pros: clear direction for the project, resulting in an efficient, seismically stable facility that better meets the needs of the Community than the current facility. Parking would be improved with the addition of a parking facility.
 Cons: The cost projections are a large commitment. An at-grade parking facility will impact the open space of the Civic Center Library Field.

Option E: New facility with underground parking. Cost: TBD (anticipated $110 million – needs further evaluation to refine)
In 2015, a new facility with new underground parking was conceptually developed after a multi-year public engagement process and extensive analysis. This option has not been effectively explored since that time but is included here to conceptually represent the range of options available.
 Pros: a purpose-built facility that better meets the needs of the Community and improves parking. Revenue-generating facilities may be possible.  Cons: The cost projections are a large commitment. The design process of a new facility will extend the schedule.

Next Steps
Upon Council approval of the recommended Project scope and budget, the project team will initiate implementation activities. Several key milestones will provide opportunities for Council updates and community engagement throughout the course of the Project. Preliminary milestone dates and topics are outlined below:

1. Award of Bridging Architect Contract – April/May 2026

2. Presentation of Bridging Documents: Update and Initial Design Review – January 2027

3. Presentation of Bridging Documents: Final Design Review – May 2027

4. Award of Construction Management Contract – January 2027

5. Award of Design-Build Entity Contract – August 2027
Sustainability Impact
The City's Climate Action Plan has explicit goals for the commercial sector to reduce natural gas usage (BE-3) a. This Project would (a) model these goals for our community through more energy efficient building systems and infrastructure, (b) save the City money, and (c) improve the local air-quality.

Fiscal Impact
The Fiscal Year (FY) 2021-22 CIP project budget for the City Hall Improvements Project is budget unit 420-99-250. If this budget modification is approved, the new Project Budget would be $54,500,000.

Fiscal Summary
Current Funding Status Amount
2136
CC 12-16-2025
2136 of 2165

Page 11 of 12 ends

City Approved Funds FY22 $500,000
FY25-26 Budget Modification
*Tonight’s action $54,000,000
New Budget (420-99-250) $54,500,000
Current Expenditures/Encumbrances Amount
Expenses to date ($118,141)
Project funds remaining: $54,381,859
To fund this project, Council may use the “For Future Use” committed reserve to fund this project. The reserve currently has $64.5 million dollars.

If Council chooses to use the reserve to fund the project, staff has prepared an updated budget forecast that incorporates all changes since the adoption of the FY 2025–26 budget through September 30, 2025. The primary impacts to the forecast are related to the loss of interest earnings; it does not yet reflect potential changes associated with the pending renewal of the law enforcement contract, which remains under negotiation.

The forecast also assumes revenue losses at the start of each fiscal year as shown. In practice, however, project-related cash outflows would occur gradually rather than all at once, which may result in a more favorable fiscal outlook.

Overall, the forecast indicates that the largest deficits would occur during the construction phase. Even with the use of the reserve, only a minimal deficit is projected in the out-years. 2137
CC 12-16-2025
2137 of 2165

Page 12 of 12 ends

City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description
Yes, FY 25-27 CWP.

City Hall Retrofit and City Hall Annex Renovation including the EOC: Implement the previously approved 2022 Council plan with EOC migration ($0).

Council Goal:

Quality of Life
California Environmental Quality Act
The project is categorically exempt from CEQA, CEQA Guidelines section 15301(existing facilities).
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Susan Michael, CIP Manager
Reviewed by: Chad Mosley, Director of Public Works
Floy Andrews, Interim City Attorney
Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager
Attachments:

A – Draft Resolution Budget Modification
B – Draft Resolution Design Build project
C – 2025 Cost Estimates City Hall
D – 2022 Cost Estimates City Hall
2138
CC 12-16-2025
2138 of 2165
Attachment A
RESOLUTION NO. __________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL

APPROVING A BUDGET MODIFICATION, INCREASE APPROPRIATION OF $54,000,000 TO THE CITY HALL IMPROVEMENTS CAPITAL

IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS PROJECT FUND
WHEREAS, the orderly administration of municipal government depends on a sound fiscal policy of maintaining a proper ratio of expenditures within anticipated revenues and available monies; and
WHEREAS, accomplishing City Council directives, projects, and programs and performing staff duties and responsibilities likewise depends on the monies available for that purpose; and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has determined that the balances from the funds specified in this resolution are adequate to cover the proposed transfer appropriations, and therefore recommends the fund reallocation described herein; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the recommended fund transfer and ratifies the attached amended appropriations as set forth in Exhibit A.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 16th day of December 2025, by the following vote:

Members of the City Council
AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
2139
CC 12-16-2025
2139 of 2165
Resolution No. __________

Page 2 ends

SIGNED:
________
Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
________________________
Date
2140
CC 12-16-2025
2140 of 2165
Resolution No. __________

Page 3 ends

EXHIBIT A
Appropriation
Amendment by
Fund
Revenue Appropriations Fund Balance
(Use of)
GENERAL $0 $54,000,000 $54,000,000
CIP $54,000,000 $54,000,000 $0
2141
CC 12-16-2025
2141 of 2165
Attachment B
RESOLUTION NO. ________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING

THE PROCUREMENT OF A DESIGN-BUILD CONTRACT FOR THE CITY

HALL IMPROVEMENTS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City Hall Improvements Capital Improvement Programs project involves design and construction of a renovation of the City Hall facility; and WHEREAS, pursuant to 22162(a) of the Public Contract Code design-build contracts for public works projects over $1,000,000 may be procured and awarded through a best value process and are allowable with approval of its governing body; and
WHEREAS, the design-build process is most likely to deliver cost and schedule benefit for this project; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby authorize the City Manager to procure a design-build contract for the City Hall Improvements Capital Improvement Programs project.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 16th day of December, 2025, by the following vote:

Members of the City Council
AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

SIGNED:
________
Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
2142
CC 12-16-2025
2142 of 2165
Resolution No. __________________

Page 2 ends

________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
________________________
Date
2143
CC 12-16-2025
2143 of 2165

ATTACHMENT C
Budgeting - Expense Projections by FY and Calendar Year Line # Site Costs City Hall
Improvement
Jul-Dec 2025 Jan-Jun 2026 Jul-Dec 2026 Jan-Jun 2027 Jul-Dec 2027 Jan-Jun 2028 Jul-Dec 2028 Jan-Jun 2029 Jul-Dec 2029 Jan-Jun 2030 1 Surveying $159,352 $79,676 $79,676
2 Site Support Costs (CEQA and
Environmental Planning)
3 Environmental Assessments,
POESA/PEA Costs
4 Hazardous Waste Removal (DTSC)
5 DTSC Fees
6 Geotechnical Surveys and
Engineering
$159,352 $79,676 $79,676
Planning Costs 2025 Costs Jul-Dec 2025 Jan-Jun 2026 Jul-Dec 2026 Jan-Jun 2027 Jul-Dec 2027 Jan-Jun 2028 Jul-Dec 2028 Jan-Jun 2029 Jul-Dec 2029 Jan-Jun 2030 7 Legal Fees
8 Bridging Architectural Fees $759,017 $75,902 $303,607 $303,607 $37,951 $37,951 9 City Permitting $637,407 $318,704 $318,704
10 Preliminary Tests, Hazmat Testing $318,704 $79,676 $79,676 $79,676 $79,676 11 Energy and Specialty Consultants $159,352 $39,838 $39,838 $39,838 $39,838 12 Other Costs - Planning (Other
Permits, Fees)
$318,704 $79,676 $79,676 $79,676 $79,676
Construction Costs 2025 Costs Jul-Dec 2025 Jan-Jun 2026 Jul-Dec 2026 Jan-Jun 2027 Jul-Dec 2027 Jan-Jun 2028 Jul-Dec 2028 Jan-Jun 2029 Jul-Dec 2029 Jan-Jun 2030 13 Main Construction Design-Build
Contractor + 10% Change Order
Contingency
$28,973,046 Construction Cost
Estimate - Oct 2025
$31,870,351 $4,780,553 $4,780,553 $9,561,105 $9,561,105 $3,187,035 14 Construction Management Fees $2,230,925 $55,773 $55,773 $111,546 $111,546 $167,319 $167,319 $669,277 $669,277 $223,092 15 Hazardous Waste Abatement $956,111 $119,514 $119,514 $358,541 $358,541 16 Other Costs - Construction $956,111 $119,514 $119,514 $358,541 $358,541 17 Interim Workplace Rental and/or
Build
$1,500,000 $262,500 $262,500 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $375,000 Construction Cost Updated: 10/09/25
Delivery Method: Design-Build
October 2025 City Hall Improvements Project Page 1 of 3 2144 CC 12-16-2025
2144 of 2165

ATTACHMENT C
Testing & Inspection Costs 2025 Costs Jul-Dec 2025 Jan-Jun 2026 Jul-Dec 2026 Jan-Jun 2027 Jul-Dec 2027 Jan-Jun 2028 Jul-Dec 2028 Jan-Jun 2029 Jul-Dec 2029 Jan-Jun 2030 18 Construction Tests $318,704 $47,806 $47,806 $95,611 $95,611 $31,870 19 Construction Inspections $637,407 $95,611 $95,611 $191,222 $191,222 $63,741 20 Commissioning $637,407 $111,546 $111,546 $414,315
Furniture & Equipment Costs 2025 Costs Jul-Dec 2025 Jan-Jun 2026 Jul-Dec 2026 Jan-Jun 2027 Jul-Dec 2027 Jan-Jun 2028 Jul-Dec 2028 Jan-Jun 2029 Jul-Dec 2029 Jan-Jun 2030 21 Standalone Furniture and
Equipment
$1,912,221 $478,055 $478,055 $956,111
22 Audio Visual Equipment (Escalated
to 2029)
$1,147,333 $286,833 $286,833 $573,666
SUBTOTALS (no esc. or contingency) $44,678,458 $75,902 $717,922 $717,922 $611,187 $611,187 $5,799,021 $5,799,021 $12,260,731 $12,260,731 $5,824,830 Jul-Dec 2025 Jan-Jun 2026 Jul-Dec 2026 Jan-Jun 2027 Jul-Dec 2027 Jan-Jun 2028 Jul-Dec 2028 Jan-Jun 2029 Jul-Dec 2029 Jan-Jun 2030 23 Escalation - 5% per Year, 20.71%
Total to Mid-Point Construction
$8,099,063 $1,214,859 $1,214,859 $2,429,719 $2,429,719 $809,906 24 Project (Owner) Contingency (for
Unforeseen Items)
$1,593,518 $79,676 $79,676 $717,083 $717,083
26 PROJECT TOTALS $54,371,039 $75,902 $717,922 $717,922 $611,187 $611,187 $7,093,556 $7,093,556 $15,407,533 $15,407,533 $6,634,736 Expenses by FY $54,371,039
Expenses by Calendar year $54,371,039 $75,902 $6,634,736 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
FY25-26 FY26-27 FY27-28 FY28-29 FY29-30
$793,824 $1,329,109 $7,704,743 $22,501,089 $22,042,269
$1,435,844 $1,222,374 $14,187,112 $30,815,066
October 2025 City Hall Improvements Project Page 2 of 3 2145 CC 12-16-2025
2145 of 2165

ATTACHMENT C
Budgeting - Encumbrance Projections by FY
Line # Encumbrances/Contracts 2025 Costs
1 Surveying $159,352
6 Geotechnical Surveys & Engineering $159,352
8 Bridging Architectural Fees $759,017
10 Preliminary Tests, Hazmat Testing $318,704
11 Energy and Specialty Consultants $159,352
14 Construction Management Fees $2,230,925
9 City Permitting $637,407
12 Other Costs - Planning (Other
Permits, Fees)
$318,704
13 Main Construction Design-Build
Contractor + 10% Change Order
Contingency
$31,870,351
15 Hazardous Waste Abatement $956,111
16 Other Costs - Construction $956,111
17 Interim Workplace Rental and/or
Build
$1,500,000
18 Construction Tests $318,704
19 Construction Inspections $637,407
20 Commissioning $637,407
21 Standalone Furniture and $1,912,221
22 Audio Visual Equipment $1,147,333
25 Project (Owner) Contingency $1,593,518
SUBTOTAL $46,271,976
24 Escalation $8,099,063
TOTAL BY FY $54,371,039
Construction Cost Updated: 10/09/25
Delivery Method: Design-Build
$1,593,518
$1,555,777 $3,824,198 $43,973,600 $5,017,464 $0
$1,147,333
$93,273 $7,322,694 $683,096
$637,407
$1,912,221
$637,407
$1,555,777 $3,730,925 $36,650,906 $4,334,368 $0
$1,500,000
$318,704
$956,111
$956,111
$31,870,351
$2,230,925
$318,704
$637,407
$159,352
$759,017
$318,704
$159,352
FY25-26 FY26-27 FY27-28 FY28-29 FY29-30
$159,352
October 2025 City Hall Improvements Project Page 3 of 3 2146 CC 12-16-2025
2146 of 2165
2025 Project
Total ( 5%
escalation)
2024 Project
Total ( 5%
escalation)
Cost per stall
2023 Project
Total (+ 25% soft
costs)
Soft Costs + 25%
Total Direct
SFElementSFAreaConstructionCost /
140City Hall Renovation - Seismic Only, Non-Essential 24, 216 5,205,308 $ 1,301,327 $ 6,506,635$ N.A.$ 6,831,967 7,173,565 $ Facility
140City Hall Renovation - Seismic Only, Essential Facility 24, 232 5,606,032 $ 1,401,508 $ 7,007,540 $ N.A.$ 7,357,917 7,725,813 $ 140City Hall Renovation - Seismic, MEP/ IT, Interior gut, 24, 807 19,491,360 $ 4,872,840 $ 24,364,200 $ N.A.$ 25,582,410 26,861,531 $ Non- Essential Facility
140City Hall Renovation - Seismic, MEP/ IT, Interior gut, 24, 868 20,955,693 $ 5,238,923 $ 26,194,616 $ N.A.$ 27,504,347 28,879,564 $ Essential Facility
140City Hall Replacement, Non-Essential Facility 24, 804 19,400,111 $ 4,850,028 $ 24,250,139 $ N.A.$ 25,462,646 26,735,778 $ 140City Hall Replacement, Essential Facility 24, 908 21,921,534 $ 5,480,384 $ 27,401,918 $ N.A.$ 28,772,013 30,210,614 $ 140City Hall Replacement w/ Added Floor, Non- 36, 809 29,237,621 $ 7,309,405 $ 36,547,027 $ N.A.$ 38,374,378 40,293,097 $ Essential Facility
140City Hall Replacement w/ Added Floor, Essential 36, 914 33,017,504 $ 8,254,376 $ 41,271,880 $ N.A.$ 43,335,474 45,502,248 $ Facility
140City Hall Replacement w/ Added Floor + 100 70, 529 37,071,561 $ 9,267,890 $ 46,339,451 $ 463,395$ 48,656,424 $ 51,089,245 $ spaces Underground parking, Non- Essential Facility
140City Hall Replacement w/ Added Floor + 100 70, 582 40,851,444 $ 10,212,861 $ 51,064,305 $ 510,643$ 53,617,520 $ 56,298,396 $ spaces Underground parking, Essential Facility
070Underground Parking ( 36 Stalls) below City Hall 12, 230 2,781,049 $ 695,262 $ 3,476,311 $ 96,564$ 3,650,126 $ 3,832,633 $ Replacement, Essential Facility ( parking only)
000City Hall Replacement w/ Added Floor + 100 34, 230 7,833,940 $ 1,958,485 $ 9,792,425 $ 97,924$ 10,282,046 $ 10,796,149 $ spaces Underground parking, Essential Facility
parking only)
2022+ Cost Estimates

ATTACHMENT A
D
2147
CC 12-16-2025
2147 of 2165

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
25-14212 Agenda Date:
12/16/2025 Agenda #:

12. Subject: City Manager Report
CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 12/10/2025
powered by Legistar™2148
CC 12-16-2025
2148 of 2165
Wednesday, December 10, 2025
A Message from the City Manager
Hello Neighbors,
I am so glad I was able to see some of you at the Holiday Tree Lighting last week. It was great to gather and light up Cupertino. In this edition, you’ll also find highlights of the City’s recent recognition from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for our smooth, well-maintained streets, an achievement we can all take pride in. With winter weather upon us, we’ve included helpful reminders and resources to help you stay safe and prepared.

You’ll also find the recorded video from our Coyote Community Meeting, aimed with tips and advice for how to help residents safely coexist with our local wildlife.

As the holiday season settles in, I find myself reflecting with gratitude on our community and the meaningful work we do together. I am proud of the work staff have accomplished over the past six months. Thank you for being part of it.

Lastly, I encourage you all to Shop Local this holiday season and support our local businesses.

Thank you for your continued engagement and partnership. I wish you and your loved ones a warm, joyful, and peaceful holiday season.

Read the full City Manager’s Newsletter December 10, 2025 and all previous editions at cupertino.gov/cmnewsletter.

Warm Regards,
Tina Kapoor, City Manager
2149
CC 12-16-2025
2149 of 2165

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
24-13582 Agenda Date:
12/16/2025 Agenda #:

13. Subject: Councilmember Reports
CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 12/10/2025
powered by Legistar™2150
CC 12-16-2025
2150 of 2165

CITY COUNCILMEMBER REPORT
Meeting: Tuesday, December 16, 2025
Reporting Councilmember: Mayor Liang Chao
Report Dates: 11/25/25 to 12/7/25
● Last Activity Report in the December 2, 2025 Council Meeting Agenda Section 1: Announcement - Message from the Mayor:
❖ Mayor’s Initiatives and other updates:
➢ Mayor’s Initiative Wrap-up will be held on Thursday December 11 at 5pm, right before the 6pm Election for Mayor and Vice Mayor. Everyone is welcome to attend to see a review of what we’ve done and thank the organizers.
❖ Monthly Chat with Mayor Community Meetings: These meetings will be generally held on the second Monday at 5pm each month, but it might be moved to other Mondays if needed. The location will rotate so that we cover different businesses each month. ➢ Special Mayor Chat at Sunny View Retirement Center on November 25th with a focus on senior services.
➢ The December Monthly Chat was held at Azuma Japanese Cuisine at the Portal Shopping Mall.

It was very well attended.
1 2151
CC 12-16-2025
2151 of 2165
❖ Process to Request Certificate of Recognition or Commendation:
➢ To ensure such requests are handled as smoothly and efficiently as possible, the City Manager’s Office has implemented a dedicated process.
➢ We kindly ask that you complete the following form, which will allow Mayor Chao to present a certificate of recognition: https://cupertino.gov/councilmeetingrequest ❖ Proclamations at Council meetings: This year, I plan to follow a tradition upheld by some former Cupertino mayors and other mayors in recognizing organizations or individuals with proclamations during Council meetings. My goal is to honor those who have made consistent and/or significant contributions to Cupertino, with an emphasis on those who are less well-known. If you have any suggestions, please feel free to email me at [email protected].

Proclamations for contributions will generally be presented at the second Council meeting of each month, while the first meeting will continue to recognize special observances (e.g., awareness months or weeks) as before. You are also welcome to submit suggestions for these recognitions.

Section 2: Committee Assignment
2025-11-26 attended the West Valley Mayors and Managers meeting - This is a monthly meeting, where mayors and city managers give updates about their cities.

Section 3: Activities by Date (Date, Title, and Description):

NOTE:
● This list does not include internal meetings with staff only, such as prep sessions or meetings with the City Manager. ● This list includes activities to “represent the community I am elected to serve”, “to respond to community needs and complaints,” and “to communicate policies and programs to residents,” among other responsibilities of a City Councilmember.
● Due to my work schedule, I have cut down on the event attendance for ceremonial purposes, especially those I have 2 2152
CC 12-16-2025
2152 of 2165
attended almost every year in the past. Instead, I focus more of my time on constituent services. 2025-12-01 attended the community meeting about Living Safely with Coyotes with wildlife experts from the County and MidPen Open Space
- The experts presented best practices and then residents shared their specific concerns. 2025-12-01 accepted the gift from Xianning City Government for the 70th anniversary of Cupertino, presented by the Xianning Friendship City Committee
- The four councilmembers present took a photo with the President of the Xianning Friendship City Committee..
2025-12-04 attended the STAR Award by the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce - They presented an award for Mike Foules of Apple and one employee each from the City, CUSD, FUHSD, Sheriff’s Office, and Fire Department and more.
2025-12-05 attended the Tree Lighting Ceremony at Quinlin Center - Gave a remark as the Mayor and welcomed Santa.
2025-12-06 attended the Holiday Sale at the Palo Alto Art Center, invited by the Cupertino Art Commissioner Gurmeet Lamba
- The Palo Alto Art Center is located at the old Palo Alto City Hall. The center has become a world renowned ceramic place, offering classes 7 days a week and generating revenue for the City of Palo Alto. There were artists selling their creations from multiple cities, including Cupertino there.
2025-12-06 attended a gathering hosted by the Hebei Chamber of Commerce and Air China - Professor Xiaojing Dong of the Santa Clara University Business School gave a speech on AI and Global Supply Chain, where she gave an introduction of AI and how they are using data analysis to help solve business issues, such as those involving the global supply chain. - Air China gave a presentation on their new programs, such as family plan or multiple-trip plan. 2025-12-06 attended the annual fundraising of the Evergreen Muslim Community Center 2025-12-07 attended the Christmas party of the River of Life Church at the China Stix restaurant 2025-12-07 attended the Candlelight Service at the West Valley Neighborhood Church

Section 4: Information Access Useful to My Constituents (not updated):

1. Public Comments Webpage and Email
A new page has been added to the City’s website on how to submit public comments for Council meetings. It explains the process for submitting written comments on City Council agenda and nonagenda
items. A dedicated email address, [email protected], was created for members 3 2153
CC 12-16-2025
2153 of 2165
of the public to send in their comments. This email address is also posted on City Council agendas.

The intent of using this dedicated email is to ensure comments are efficiently routed and tracked. Emails sent to this address are automatically distributed to the City Council, City Manager, Deputy City Manager, and City Clerk, and an autoresponder confirms receipt. This process is especially helpful during periods of high public input.

Comment Submission Guidelines:

2. Information Memo posted on the City website:

City Council Informational Memos are now available on the City website. The information can be accessed from the City website at cupertino.org/memos and the City Council page. You can also find the page by entering search terms “info memos” at the top of the website. ★ Anyone may use the eNotification signup to receive informational memo updates by email.
★ The info memos are now hosted in the digital archive as all other city records. ★ Click “+” to zoom in.
★ On a laptop:
○ To open the document as PDF, click on the Print icon and then click on “Download & Print”. The downloaded PDF will appear in a new tab for viewing. ○ This does not work on Safari browser on an iPhone.
★ To copy and paste text, you must open it as PDF and then copy & paste from there.

New memos posted, since last report:
● No new info memos published since February 28
● Recordings of Commission Meetings:

Starting in June, commission meetings will be recorded for viewing later, although no teleconferencing to allow remote participation.
- Find the recordings here under each commission.

4. How to Search an agenda item:

A community member showed me a way to search for items on the past city meetings:
● Go to this page: https://cupertino.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx ○ Make sure that “Calendar” is selected from the top row of tabs and the “List View” is selected from the bottom row of tabs.
○ Enter the search term, such as “investment report”. Choose the year or select “All Years”
4 2154
CC 12-16-2025
2154 of 2165
5 2155
CC 12-16-2025
2155 of 2165
1 CITY COUNCILMEMBER REPORT
Meeting: December 16, 2025
Reporting Councilmember: Councilmember J.R. Fruen
Report Dates: 11/25/25 to 12/8/25
Item Date, Title, and Description:

Event 1. December 1, 2025 – Meeting with City Manager – I met with City Manager Tina Kapoor to go over upcoming council agenda items, items of interest, and issues raised by residents.

Event 2. December 3, 2025 – Meeting with City Manager – I met with City Manager Tina Kapoor to go over upcoming council agenda items, items of interest, and issues raised by residents.

Event 3. December 4, 2025 – Cupertino Chamber of Commerce Star Awards – Together with Mayor Chao, Vice Mayor Moore, and Councilmember Mohan, I attended the Chamber’s annual awards dinner in recognition of their contributions to the community.

Event 4. December 7, 2025 – Cities Association of Santa Clara County JPA Special Board Meeting and Holiday Mixer – I attended this final meeting of the CASCC Board for 2025 at which the outgoing President (Mayor Larry Klein – Sunnyvale) and the organization’s champion of the year (Sen. Josh Becker) were honored and the new Executive Committee introduced. The event was well-attended and allowed elected and appointed officials from across the county to meet and converse in a less formal setting.

Event 5. December 8, 2025 – Meeting with City Manager – I met with City Manager Tina Kapoor to go over upcoming council agenda items, items of interest, and issues raised by residents.
2156
CC 12-16-2025
2156 of 2165
1 CITY COUNCILMEMBER REPORT
Meeting: December 16, 2025
Reporting Councilmember: Councilmember Sheila Mohan
Report Dates: 11/25/25 to 12/8/25
Item Date, Title, and Description:
12/1/25: I attended the Audit Committee Meeting at which the draft of the City’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) was discussed. The report will be agendized for City Council approval in January 2026.

12/4/25: I attended the STAR Awards and Holiday Party hosted by the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce at the Juniper Hotel. This was a well-organized and well attended event. Accomplished high school students, and dedicated public safety employees, city staff and community organizations were recognized for their myriad contributions to the City.

12/5/25: The City held its annual Christmas Tree Lighting event at the Quinlan Community Center. As always, the Parks and Recreation Department staff did a superb job organizing the event and managing the crowd of kids and their parents. Santa descended from the fire truck exuding holiday cheer, the tree lighting was executed flawlessly, and a very good time was had by all. 12/7/25: Along with Councilmember Fruen, I attended the Cities Association Holiday Party at the new and sparkling Treehouse Hotel in Sunnyvale. All 15 cities within Santa Clara County were represented by their council members.

County and State representatives attended as well, and Senator Josh Becker was recognized for his sustainability efforts and funding to cities to enhance their public safety efforts.
2157
CC 12-16-2025
2157 of 2165
1 CITY COUNCILMEMBER REPORT
Meeting: December 16, 2025
Reporting Councilmember: Vice Mayor Kitty Moore
Report Dates: 11/25/25 to 12/8/25
Item Date, Title, and Description:

December 1, 2025. Agenda Review with Mayor and Staff.

December 1, 2025. Audit Committee Meeting. The Committee had a robust discussion about the current ACFR and next year’s work plan. Meeting Materials are here:
https://cupertino.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1359883&GUID=724E28C6- BCBD-40FD-8CC8-81041FAB8416&Options=info|&Search=
December 1, 2025. Living Safely with Coyotes Community Meeting. This was a well-attended event unfortunately due to aggressive coyotes reported in the area.

Persistent hazing has been noted to be effective. Information about what coyote hazing is may be found here: https://projectcoyote.org/wpcontent/uploads/2015/10/Hazing_Field_Guide_2015.pdf December 1, 2025. Special City Council Meeting.

December 2, 2025. Special City Council Meeting, continued to December 12, 2025.

December 4, 2025. Agenda Review with Mayor and Staff.

December 4, 2025. Cupertino Chamber of Commerce annual STAR award dinner.

Attended this festive event celebrating Chamber of Commerce award winners for 2025.
2158
CC 12-16-2025
2158 of 2165
City Council Vice Mayor Moore Report
2 December 5, 2025. Community Tree Lighting. Joyfully attended this happy event. Hats off to the Homestead High School Choir, the Homestead Cheer Team, City Staff under the Direction of Parks and Recreation Director
Rachelle Sander,
Cupertino City Manager
Tina Kapoor, City Council
and Commissioners,
many, many youth
volunteers, and all of the
guests, including the Fire
Department escorts of the
special tree lighting
surprise guest.

December 8, 2025. Agenda review with Mayor and Staff. Reviewed agendas up to and including January 21, 2026.

Have a safe and Happy New Year!
2159
CC 12-16-2025
2159 of 2165
1 CITY COUNCILMEMBER REPORT
Meeting: December 16, 2025
Reporting Councilmember: Councilmember R "Ray" Wang
Report Dates: 10/15/25 to 12/9/25
Item Date, Title, and Description:

October 19, 2025. No on Measure A rally. Attended and spoke at the rally for supporters.

October 28, 2025. Ad hoc Legislative Review Committee received Gonsalves and Son final update to the LRC. LRC recommended the formalization of the LRC to the same approach prior to 2023.

October 30, 2025. Attended the Disaster Council Meeting.

November 2, 2025. Inspected the damage caused by the Friends of Stevens Creek trail and observed trespassing despite city signage and fences.

November 4, 2025. Attended Regular Closed Session and City Council meeting.

November 8, 2025. Attended and spoke at the International Kung Fu Day festivities at Memorial Park.

November 10, 2025. Attended regularly scheduled City Manager meeting on agenda and ongoing issues November 10, 2025. Attended the Mayor’s Monthly Meeting.

November 11, 2025. Veterans’ Day Celebration. Attended the ceremony honoring veterans, first responders, and loved ones for their service.

November 14, 2025. Met with staff about City Hall renovation options.

November 17, 2025. Met with Chamber of Commerce CEO on economic development ideas.

November 17, 2025. Attended Economic Development Committee.

November 17, 2025. Met with Apple.
2160
CC 12-16-2025
2160 of 2165
City Council Councilmember Report
2 November 17, 2025. Attended the Cupertino Public Facilities Corporation Annual Board of Directors Meeting. The next CPFC board meeting will be held in January.

November 18, 2025. City Council Regular Meeting. This meeting was curtailed due to technical difficulties with Zoom which prevents the public from attending noticed locations for remote participation.

November 23, 2025. Met with Garden Gate community to hear their issues about the Mary Ave project.

December 1, 2025. Spoke with Apple about upcoming projects.

December 1, 2025. Continuation of the November 18th, City Council Regular Meeting.

December 2, 2025. Attended Regular Closed Session and City Council meeting.

December 8, 2025. Attended regularly scheduled City Manager meeting on agenda and ongoing issues
December 8, 2025. Met with the Interim City Attorney on closed session topics. 2161
CC 12-16-2025
2161 of 2165

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
25-14092 Agenda Date:
12/16/2025 Agenda #:

14. Subject: Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report
CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 12/10/2025
powered by Legistar™2162
CC 12-16-2025
2162 of 2165
Upcoming Draft Agenda Items

CITY OF CUPERTINO
City Council
Wednesday, January 21, 2026
Consent Calendar
25-14368 Subject: Approval of procedures for issuing proclamations and certificates
25-14418 Subject: Ratifying Accounts Payable for the periods ending 25-14419 Subject: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for 25-14420 Subject: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for 25-14213 Subject: Approval of an agreement to replace Cupertino’s HR and Financial Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system
25-14591 Subject: Approve a Second Amendment to the contract with Independent Code Consultants, Inc., for an increase of cost pass-through amount of $225,000 to provide On-Call Plan Review Services for FY26 for a total not-to-exceed amount of $540,000.
25-14598 Subject: Approval of December 11, 2025 City Council meeting minutes 25-14599 Subject: Approval of December 12, 2025 City Council meeting minutes Public Hearings
25-14471 Subject: Consideration of a new residential development of 57 townhomes, including 11 affordable units, to replace two office buildings on a 2.6-acre site, located close to the northeast corner of the intersection of Stevens Creek Blvd and Randy Lane. (Application No(s): DP-2025-001, ASA-2024-016, TM-2024-010, TR-2024-045, & U-2025-006; Applicant(s):

Dividend Homes; Location: 20085 & 20111 Stevens Creek Blvd. (A.P.N.:
316-23-025, -026)
25-14472 Subject: Consider a new residential development of 32 townhomes, including 6 affordable units, to replace three office buildings on a

1.77-acre site, located mid-block corner on Stevens Creek Boulevard between Randy Lane and Blaney Avenue. (Application No(s):

DP-2025-002, ASA-2025-004, TM-2025-002, TR-2025-002, & U-2025-007; Applicant(s): Dividend Homes; Location: 20045 & 20065 Stevens Creek Blvd. (A.P.N.: 316-23-095, -096)
Action Calendar
25-14231 Subject: Business license renewal procedure update and establishment of an amnesty period for outstanding renewals

Page 1 ends

DRAFT
2163
CC 12-16-2025
2163 of 2165
Wednesday, December 10, 2025
25-14181 Subject: A resolution rescinding Resolution 24-022 and amending the resolution establishing rules governing recruitment, attendance, appointments, and vacancies on City advisory bodies
25-14521 Subject: Approval to execute a contract with Santa Clara County Office of the Sheriff for a five-year period 2025/26 to 2030/31
25-14582 Subject: Review and discussion of potential 2026 ballot measures and options for Council consideration
Councilmember Reports
25-14600 Subject: Councilmember Reports
City Manager Report
25-14617 Subject: City Manager Report
Tuesday, January 27, 2026
Councilmember Reports
25-14601 Subject: Councilmember Reports
Tuesday, February 3, 2026
Consent Calendar
25-14620 Subject: Approval of January 21, 2026 City Council minutes 25-14201 Subject: Accept Federal grant funding and award design professional services agreement to XXXXXXXX for a total-not-to-exceed contract amount of $XXX,XXX for the McClellan Road Bridge Reconstruction Project.

Public Hearings
25-14563 Subject: Appeal of fee determination made by the City Collector for Business License renewal; public hearing pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code (CMC) Section 5.04.480(C); Appellant: Annie Lee; Business: Lee's Sandwiches; Business Address: 20363 Steven Creek Blvd, Cupertino, CA 95014 (Postponed from November 18, 2025)
25-14593 Subject: Consider a Use Permit, Tentative Map, Architectural and Site Approval, and Tree Removal Permit to consider the construction of a 122-unit residential development, consisting of 66 small-lot single family homes and 56 townhomes at Steven’s Creek Office Center. The project utilizes Senate Bill 330 and provisions of State Density Bonus law. (Application No(s): U-2024-008, TM-2024-006, ASA-2024-011, TR-2024-033; Applicant(s): Harvest Properties, Inc.; Location: 20807, 20813, 20823, & 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd; APNs: 326 32 050, -051, -052, and-053).

Action Calendar

Page 2 ends

DRAFT
2164
CC 12-16-2025
2164 of 2165
Wednesday, December 10, 2025
25-14125 Subject: Introduce first reading of an ordinance to make minor updates and minor technical corrections to the Cupertino Municipal Code as follows: amending (Title 5 Business Licenses and Regulations, Chapter

5.04 Administration, Section 5.04.480 Appeal Procedure) and (Title 11 Streets and Vehicles, Chapter 11.28 Miscellaneous Parking Regulations, Sections 11.28.010 Definitions and 11.28.050 Sale of Merchandise); 3.23.020 Definitions. ("Public works project") to align with AB2192; 13.04.180 Advertising and Sale Restrictions
Councilmember Reports
25-14618 Subject: Councilmember Reports
City Manager Report
25-14619 Subject: City Manager Report
Tuesday, February 17, 2026
Consent Calendar
25-14621 Subject: Approval of February 3, 2026 City Council minutes 25-14128 Subject: Second reading and enactment of an ordinance to make minor updates and minor technical corrections to the Cupertino Municipal Code as follows: amending (Title 5 Business Licenses and Regulations, Chapter

5.04 Administration, Section 5.04.480 Appeal Procedure) and (Title 11 Streets and Vehicles, Chapter 11.28 Miscellaneous Parking Regulations, Sections 11.28.010 Definitions and 11.28.050 Sale of Merchandise); 3.23.020 Definitions. ("Public works project") to align with AB2192 25-14490 Subject: Adopt the Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) and Pension Trust Investment Policies
25-14421 Subject: Ratifying Accounts Payable for the periods ending 25-14422 Subject: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for 25-14423 Subject: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for 25-14459 Subject: Receive the City Manager's Mid-Year Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2025-26
Action Calendar
25-14162 Subject: Introduction of Amendments to Municipal Code Section 2.88.100 Duties-Powers-Responsibilities of the Audit Committee
Councilmember Reports
25-14622 Subject: Councilmember Reports
City Manager Report
25-14623 Subject: City Manager Report

Page 3 ends

DRAFT
2165
CC 12-16-2025
2165 of 2165

Cupertino City CouncilDecember 16, 2025

Cupertino City Council
December 16, 2025