Cupertino City Council
April 7, 2026

Tuesday, April 7, 2026
5:45 PM

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Televised Special Meeting (5:45) and Televised Regular City Council Meeting (6:45)
10350 Torre Avenue, Council Chamber and via Teleconference City Council

KITTY MOORE, MAYOR

LIANG CHAO, VICE MAYOR
J.R. FRUEN, COUNCILMEMBER

SHEILA MOHAN, COUNCILMEMBER
R "RAY" WANG, COUNCILMEMBER

IN PERSON AND TELECONFERENCE MEETING
For more information: (408) 777-3200 | www.cupertino.gov AGENDA
1 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
1 of 2882
City Council Agenda April 7, 2026

IN-PERSON AND TELECONFERENCE / PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INFORMATION OPTIONS TO OBSERVE:

Members of the public wishing to observe the meeting may do so in one of the following ways:
1) Attend in person at Cupertino Community Hall, 10350 Torre Avenue. 2) Tune to Comcast Channel 26 and AT&T U-Verse Channel 99 on your TV. 3) Watch a live stream online at www.Cupertino.gov/youtube and www.Cupertino.org/webcast
4) Attend in person at a remote Teleconference Location noticed pursuant to Gov. Code 54953(b)(2), which location, if noticed, would be stated on the cover page of this agenda.

OPTIONS TO PARTICIPATE AND COMMENT:

Members of the public wishing to address the City Council may do so in the following ways:
1) Appear in person for Open Session at Cupertino Community Hall.

A. During “Oral Communications”, the public may comment on matters not on the agenda, and for agendized matters, the public may comment during the public comment period for each agendized item.

B. Speakers are requested to complete a Speaker Card. While completion of Speaker Cards is voluntary and not required to attend the meeting or provide comments, it is helpful for the purposes of ensuring that all speakers are called upon.

C. Speakers must wait to be called, then proceed to the lectern/podium and speak into the microphone when recognized by the Mayor.

D. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each. However, the Mayor may reduce the speaking time depending on the number of people who wish to speak on an item. A speaker representing a group between 2 and 5 members of the public in attendance may have up to 2 minutes per group member to speak, up to 10 minutes maximum.

E. Please note that due to cyber security concerns, speakers are not allowed to connect any personal devices at the lectern/podium. However, speakers that wish to share a document (e.g. presentations, photographs or other documents) during oral comments may do so in one of the following ways:
a) At the overhead projector at the podium, or
b) E-mail the document to [email protected] by 3:00 p.m. and staff will advance the

2 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
2 of 2882
City Council Agenda April 7, 2026
slides/share the documents during your oral comment.
2) Written Communications as follows:

A. E-mail comments to the City Council for Open Session at [email protected] as follows:
a. E-mail comments must be received by 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting in order to be forwarded to the City Council before the meeting.
b. Emailed comments received following agenda publication but prior to, or during, the meeting, will be posted to the City’s website after the meeting. c. These e-mail comments will also be received by each City Councilmember, the City Manager, and the City Clerk’s Office. Comments on non-agenda items sent to any other email address will be included upon the sender's request.

B. Regular mail or hand delivered addressed to the: City Council, City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014
3) Open Session Teleconference in one of the following ways:

A. Online via Zoom on an electronic device (Audio and Video): Speakers must register in advance by clicking on the link below to access the meeting:
https://cityofcupertino.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_ZJyUahumQ_-S8FhNskAbgw a) Registrants will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.
b) Speakers will be recognized by the name they use for registration. Once recognized, speakers must click ‘unmute’ when prompted to speak.
c) Please read the following instructions about technical compatibility carefully: One can directly download the teleconference (Zoom) software or connect to the meeting in their internet browser. If a browser is used, make sure the most current and up-to-date browser, such as the following, is used: Chrome 30+, Firefox 27+, Microsoft Edge 12+, Safari 7+.

Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers, including Internet Explorer.

B. By Phone (Audio only): No registration is required in advance and speakers may join the meeting as follows:
a) Dial 669-900-6833 and enter WEBINAR ID: 828 2032 8666 b) To “raise hand” to speak: Dial *9; When asked to unmute: Dial *6 c) Speakers will be recognized to speak by the last four digits of their phone number.

C. Via an H.323/SIP room system:

Join from an H.323/SIP room system:

H.323:

3 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
3 of 2882
City Council Agenda April 7, 2026
144.195.19.161 (US West)
206.247.11.121 (US East)
Meeting ID: 828 2032 8666
SIP: [email protected]
D. Online via the teleconferencing device (Audio and Video) being used to provide access to the meeting from a remote Teleconference Location noticed pursuant to Gov. Code 54953(b)(2), which location, if noticed, would be stated on the cover page of this agenda. a) Speakers are required to notify the City Clerk via email to [email protected] prior to noon on the date of the meeting during which they plan to participate and comment from the remote location noticed to ensure the City Clerk is prepared to accept their comment. b) If the teleconferencing device malfunctions impeding access to the meeting from the remote location, the speaker may alternatively participate via the other options for remote participation provided above.

NOTICE AND CALL FOR A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special meeting of the Cupertino City Council is hereby called for Tuesday, April 07, 2026, commencing at 5:45 p.m. in Community Hall Council Chamber, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 and via teleconference. Said special meeting shall be for the purpose of conducting business on the subject matters listed below under the heading, “Special Meeting."

SPECIAL MEETING
ROLL CALL - 5:45 PM
10350 Torre Avenue and via Teleconference

STUDY SESSION

1. Subject: An update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan, including a summary of Phase 2, explanations of plan edits, revised scoring criteria, and next steps.

Recommended Action: Receive an update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan and provide feedback on the agenda packet attachments.

Staff Report
A - November 04, 2025, City Council Staff Report
B - Revised Project Prioritization Criteria
C - Draft Prioritized Project List
D - Revised Program and Policy Recommendations
E - Draft Project Impact Evaluation Guidelines
F - Draft Project Effectiveness Guidelines
G - Draft Network Recommendations Maps
H - Visual Glossary

4 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
4 of 2882
City Council Agenda April 7, 2026

ADJOURNMENT

REGULAR MEETING
CALL TO ORDER - 6:45 PM
10350 Torre Avenue and via Teleconference

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

CLOSED SESSION REPORT

CEREMONIAL ITEMS

1. Subject: Proclamation in recognition of April as Donate Life Month.

Recommended Action: Present proclamation recognizing April as Donate Life Month.

A - Proclamation

2. Subject: Proclamation in recognition of April as Fair Housing Month.

Recommended Action: Present proclamation recognizing April as Fair Housing Month.

A - Proclamation

POSTPONEMENTS AND ORDERS OF THE DAY

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Council on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Council and not on the agenda for discussion. Oral Communications shall be limited to 30 minutes. Additional speakers wishing to comment on non-agenda items may be given time to speak at the end of the agenda, after the City Manager's report. Individual speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. As necessary, the Chair may further limit the time allowed to individual speakers, or reschedule remaining comments to the end of the meeting on a first come first heard basis, with priority given to students. In most cases, State law will prohibit the Council from discussing or making any decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the agenda. A councilmember may, however, briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by speakers. A councilmember may also ask a question for clarification, provide a reference for factual information, request staff to report back concerning a matter, or request that an item be added to a future City Council agenda in response to public comment.

CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 3-10)
Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine City business and may be approved by one motion. Typical items may include meeting minutes, awards of contracts, the ratification of accounts payable, and second readings of ordinances. Any member of the Council may request to have

5 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
5 of 2882
City Council Agenda April 7, 2026
an item removed from the Consent Calendar based on the rules set forth in the City Council Procedures Manual. Members of the public may provide input on one or more consent calendar items when the Mayor asks for public comments on the Consent Calendar.

3. Subject: Approval of February 28, 2026 City Council meeting minutes.

Recommended Action: Approve the February 28, 2026 City Council meeting minutes.

A - Draft Minutes

4. Subject: Approval of March 17, 2026 City Council meeting minutes.

Recommended Action: Approve the March 17, 2026 City Council meeting minutes.

A - Draft Minutes

5. Subject: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for February 2026.

Recommended Action: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for February 2026.

Staff Report
A - Chandler Investment Report Feb 2026

6. Subject: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for February 2026.

Recommended Action: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for February 2026.

Staff Report
A – Report of City-wide Receipts, Disbursements, and Cash Balances February 2026 B – Report of City-wide Fund BalancesNet Position February 2026

7. Subject: Consider adopting Resolution No. 26-034 to establish a Policy on Flags on City Property.

Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 26-034 to establish a Policy on Flags on City Property.

Staff Report
A - Draft Resolution
B - Draft Policy on Flags on City Property

8. Subject: Approval of a resolution to authorize application for the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant operated by the Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project.

Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 26-035 of the City Council authorizing the City to apply for funds through the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant Operated by The Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project.

Staff Report
A - Draft Resolution
B - Sample FY26 Standard Grant Agreement Template

6 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
6 of 2882
City Council Agenda April 7, 2026

9. Subject: Approve a budget modification in the amount of $475,000 for ballot measure preparation services and County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voter election services fees.

Recommended Action: 1. Approve a Budget Adjustment in the amount of $475,000 in the General Fund for ballot support services with TeamCivX and election services fees from the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters (GL# 100-41-405 700-702)

2. Adopt Resolution No. 26-036 approving budget modification #2526-437, approving a additional General Fund appropriation in the amount of $475,000 for ballot support services with TeamCivX and election services fees from the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters (GL# 100-41-405 700-702).

Staff Report
A - Draft Resolution

10. Subject: Authorization for Mayor to Sign Multi-Jurisdictional Letter Regarding State Housing Legislation.

Recommended Action: Authorize the Mayor to sign a joint letter with West Valley Mayors requesting the State Legislature to consider a temporary pause on new housing legislation to allow for evaluation and implementation of existing laws.

Staff Report
A – Letter from Mayor Turner to Speaker Rivas

PUBLIC HEARINGS
Government Code Section 65103.5 limits the distribution of copyrighted material associated with the review of development projects. Members of the public wishing to view plans that cannot otherwise be distributed under Govt. Code Section 65103.5 may make an appointment with the Planning Division to view them at City Hall by sending an email to [email protected]. Plans will also be made available digitally during the hearing to consider the proposal.

11. Subject: Consider a Use Permit, Tentative Map, Architectural and Site Approval, and Tree Removal Permit for the construction of a 122-unit residential development, consisting of 66 small-lot single family homes and 56 townhomes located at the Stevens Creek Office Center site, which includes a multi-tenant retail building (Voyager Coffee and Panera Bread). 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: Kevin Choy, Harvest Properties; Location: 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd; APNs: 326-32-050, -051, -052, and -053.)

7 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
7 of 2882
City Council Agenda April 7, 2026
Recommended Action: 1. Find the project statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and

2. Approve the following permits:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 26-037 approving Use Permit (U-2024-008) (Attachment A); and
b. Adopt Resolution No. 26-038 approving Architectural & Site Approval Permit (ASA-2024-011) (Attachment B); and
c. Adopt Resolution No. 26-039 approving Tentative Map (TM-2026-006) (Attachment C); and
d. Adopt Resolution No. 26-040 approving Tree Removal permit (TR-2024-033) (Attachment D).

Staff Report
A - Draft Resolution U-2024-008
B - Draft Resolution ASA-2024-011
C - Draft Resolution TM-2024-006
D - Draft Resolution TR-2024-033
E - Relevant State Law
F - Arborist Report and Peer Review
G - CEQA Exemption Memorandum
H - Public Comment
I - Site Plan and Renderings
J - Complete Plan Set

ACTION CALENDAR

12. Subject: Award of a consultant agreement with PlaceWorks, not to exceed $468,450, to prepare a Housing Element update (and internal consistency updates to the General Plan), related rezoning, and all necessary environmental review as required under State law, and associated budget modification in the amount of $660,00, to address requirements of Government Code Section 65863 (No Net Loss) and authorize no-cost contract change.

Recommended Action: That the City Council:

1. Adopt Resolution No. 26-041 (Attachment A) to approve Budget Modification #2526-436 to increase appropriations in 100-71-702 750-101 (Fiscal Year 2025-26 Adopted Budget) by $660,000 for the fiscal year 2025-26 for the project; and

2. Award a consultant agreement with PlaceWorks for an amount not to exceed $468,450 for a Housing Element update, internal consistency updates to the General Plan, related rezoning, and all necessary environmental review as required under State law (Attachment B) and authorize execution thereof by the City Manager; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to approve contract amendments with PlaceWorks, up to an amount not to exceed $515,425 for additional unanticipated work that is related to the scope of the agreement.

8 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
8 of 2882
City Council Agenda April 7, 2026
Staff Report
A - Draft Resolution
B - Contract, Scope of Work, and Fee Estimate

13. Subject: Consider updates to procedures administering the City’s Commissions and Committees and revising the City Commissioners’ Handbook to reflect the new procedures.

Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution 26-042 updating the Commissioners’ Handbook to (1) appoint alternates to assist with quorum requirements when regular members are absent, (2) promote broad community participation on the City’s commissions and committees, (3) align attendance requirements and Council’s discretion over consequences for missing meetings; (4) recognize advisory body members’ autonomy while ensuring the advisory body’s actions are fairly communicated.

Staff Report
A - Draft Resolution and Commissioners' Handbook (Exhibit A) B - Commissioners' Handbook - Redline
C - Commissioners' Handbook - Clean (Exhibit A)

14. Subject: Determine next steps for the agreement with the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce.

Recommended Action: Receive update and provide direction on the agreement with the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce.

1. Authorize Agreement Extension with Revised Scope of Work (Recommended); or

2. Authorize Agreement to Expire without Extension; or

3. Authorize Agreement Extension with Existing Scope and Funding.

Staff Report
A - Cupertino Chamber Executed Agreement and Scope of Work B - Quarterly Reports April 2024 through December 2025
C - Chamber Relationships in Other Cities
D - Revised Scope of Work (redline)
E - Revised Scope of Work (clean)
F - Revised Compensation (redline)
G - Revised Compensation (clean)

ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY MANAGER REPORT

15. Subject: City Manager Report
A - City Manager's Report

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - CONTINUED

COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS

9 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
9 of 2882
City Council Agenda April 7, 2026

16. Subject: Councilmember Reports
A - Councilmember Report, Fruen
B - Councilmember Report, Mohan
C - Councilmember Report, Moore

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
The Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report is a tentative council meeting agenda calendar that lists upcoming City Council meeting dates and tentative agenda items, all of which are subject to change.

17. Subject: Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report
A - Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report

ADJOURNMENT
Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Requirements: Individuals who influence or attempt to influence legislative or administrative action may be required by the City of Cupertino’s lobbying ordinance (Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 2.100) to register and report lobbying activity. Persons whose communications regarding any legislative or administrative are solely limited to appearing at or submitting testimony for any public meeting held by the City are not required to register as lobbyists.

For more information about the lobbying ordinance, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014; telephone (408) 777-3223; email [email protected]; and website: www.cupertino.org/lobbyist.

The City of Cupertino has adopted the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure §1094.6; litigation challenging a final decision of the City Council must be brought within 90 days after a decision is announced unless a shorter time is required by State or Federal law.

Prior to seeking judicial review of any adjudicatory (quasi-judicial) decision, interested persons must file a petition for reconsideration within ten calendar days of the date the City Clerk mails notice of the City’s decision. Reconsideration petitions must comply with the requirements of Cupertino Municipal Code §2.08.096. Contact the City Clerk’s office for more information or go to http://www.cupertino.org/cityclerk for a reconsideration petition form.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend this meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. In addition, upon request in advance by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative format.

Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Cupertino City Council after publication of

10 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
10 of 2882
City Council Agenda April 7, 2026
the packet will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014, during normal business hours; and in Council packet archives linked from the agenda/minutes page on the City web site.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code section

2.08.100 written communications sent to the City Council, Commissioners or staff concerning a matter on the agenda are included as supplemental material to the agendized item. These written communications are accessible to the public through the City website and kept in packet archives. Do not include any personal or private information in written communications to the City that you do not wish to make public, as written communications are considered public records and will be made publicly available on the City website.

11 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
11 of 2882

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
26-14906 Agenda Date: 4/7/2026
Agenda #: 1.

Subject: An update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan, including a summary of Phase 2, explanations of plan edits, revised scoring criteria, and next steps.

Receive an update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan and provide feedback on the agenda packet attachments.

CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/3/2026
powered by Legistar™ 12
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
12 of 2882
1 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

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

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Date: April 07, 2026
Subject
An update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan, including a summary of Phase 2, explanations of plan edits, revised scoring criteria, and next steps.

Recommended Action
Receive an update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan and provide feedback on the agenda packet attachments.

Executive Summary
The City of Cupertino is developing an Active Transportation Plan (ATP) to update and consolidate the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan and the 2018 Pedestrian Transportation Plan.

The ATP is a City Work Program project and fully funded through TDA Article 3 funds, a state funding source for bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Phase 1 of the project established the technical foundation for the Plan, which included a Needs Assessment and Existing Conditions Review that applied methods such as Active Trip Potential and Level of Traffic Stress to identify where walking and biking are most challenging and where short vehicle trips could realistically shift to active modes. Community input validated the analysis and emphasized strong support for improving safety on the Vision Zero High-Injury Network (HIN), connectivity to schools, designing for all ages and abilities, and balancing project tradeoffs for drivers.

Phase 2 advanced the Plan through continued engagement and produced clear priorities for both pedestrian and bicycle networks. The ATP and the draft prioritization criteria were presented to Commissions and Council in fall 2025, where there was strong consensus and feedback converged on prioritizing safety (especially near schools and on the HIN), using objective metrics to score projects, and elevating technology solutions. These comments led staff to revise the scoring frameworks and create a new project category, Transportation Technology Corridors.

Staff also developed a new set of guidelines to address comments on potential project impacts and on how to measure project effectiveness. Next steps are to release a draft ATP for public review in spring, incorporate revisions, and return to City Council for adoption in late June or early July.
13 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
13 of 2882
2 Background
With substantial progress made on implementing the recommended projects from the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan and the 2018 Pedestrian Transportation Plan, a new, comprehensive Active Transportation Plan (ATP) is being developed that will build on those successes and address evolving community needs. Additionally, this unified, citywide plan will align bicycle and pedestrian initiatives while accounting for the needs of motorized vehicles. This coordinated approach ensures consistency across policies and projects, avoids duplication, and addresses overlapping concerns.

The City Council approved the FY 24/25 City Work Program on April 3, 2024, with the ATP included as an approved project. City staff then identified Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA3) funds as an external funding source to wholly fund the Plan's development. On December 3, 2024, the City Council authorized the City Manager to award a contract to Alta Planning + Design, Inc., for development of an ATP.

Phase 1 Summary
Phase 1 of the ATP occurred between March and June 2025. It included policy review, community outreach, and technical analysis to develop data-driven project recommendations. The first step of Phase 1 was to develop a Plan Review Memo to ensure the ATP is consistent with and supports local and regional policies, including Cupertino plans like the General Plan’s Mobility Element and Vision Zero Action Plan, the Countywide Active Transportation Plan, and other relevant documents.

Phase 1 also resulted in a Vision, Goals, and Objectives Memo. This document captured the shared vision that Cupertino should be a community where walking, biking, and rolling are easy, safe, and comfortable for everyone. The ATP’s vision, goals, and objectives were developed by consolidating similar and overlapping statements from existing Cupertino plans and refining them using input gathered during Phase 1 outreach to also reflect today's community needs and concerns. The community ranked these goals in order of importance, as shown below:

1. Safety: Consistent with the Vision Zero Action Plan, pursue an active transportation network that reduces the number of serious and fatal crashes involving pedestrians, bicyclists, and other active transportation users to zero. Enact measures to anticipate human error and minimize the impact of traffic crashes for all roadway users.

2. Accessibility: Provide a well-connected multimodal transportation network that offers comfortable and convenient walking and biking options to key destinations for all residents and visitors in the City.

3. Maintenance: Active transportation needs should be considered and integrated in all City roadway maintenance activities.

4. Sustainability: Advance environmental quality and economic prosperity for the City by providing inviting active transportation facilities that encourage frequent usage and improve adoption of all non-vehicle modes of travel, resulting in a reduction in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHGs). 14 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
14 of 2882
3 5. Multimodal Balance: Consider multimodal priorities and impacts of all projects to improve sustainable transportation options throughout the City. Limit impacts to all other transportation modes whenever possible, including transit and personal vehicles.

6. Fairness: Provide a multimodal transportation system that is equally distributed across all neighborhoods in Cupertino.

During Phase 1, the project team also conducted a Needs Assessment and an Existing Conditions Review. These documents examined the City’s transportation network in detail, identifying where walkers and bikers feel stressed or disconnected. Analyses such as Active Trip Potential and Level of Traffic Stress were applied to determine areas in the City where existing short driving trips could realistically shift to walking or biking. Together, these analysis methods established a clear picture of where gaps are greatest and where investments could potentially yield the greatest community benefits.

In parallel with the analysis task, staff reached out to the community to learn which destinations they want to travel to and what barriers prevent them from walking or biking. Residents consistently expressed concerns about safety on the Vision Zero High-Injury Network (HIN), the need for improved connectivity between neighborhoods and schools, the need to consider potential project impacts on drivers, and the importance of designing facilities for people of all ages and abilities. Feedback from the community helped validate the technical analysis, and together, these two sources, along with state and federal design guidance documents such as the Caltrans Design Information Bulletin Number 94 and the Federal Highway Administration Bikeway Selection Guide, were leveraged to develop draft network recommendations.

Draft project prioritization criteria that align with the Plan goals were established to assist in ranking the draft network recommendations. The scoring metrics were selected to be consistent with community goals and VTA Measure B funding requirements. These criteria were presented to the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (August 20, 2025), Planning Commission (September 9, 2025), and City Council (November 4, 2025) for review and public comment. These draft project prioritization criteria included the following metrics to rank recommended projects:
• Collision History
• Stress Level
• School Proximity
• High Frequency Transit Proximity
• Parks & Other Destination Proximity
• Active Trip Potential
• Roadway Impact
• Public Input
Phase 2 Summary
Following Phase 1, the project transitioned to the Network Recommendations Phase (Phase 2).

All Phase 1 documents can be referenced on the project webpage at www.cupertino.gov/atp. This information was included in the staff report (Attachment A) for the November 04, 2025, City Council meeting. During this phase, public engagement continued, with the community 15 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
15 of 2882
4 encouraged to review and comment on the draft network recommendations. Phase 2 ran from August 20 to November 30 and consisted of eight pop-up events and three public hearings. The online input webmap was also updated to allow community members to review and comment on the project recommendations using the project webpage.

Phase 2 public outreach once again highlighted repeated concerns about intersection conflicts, particularly with right-turning vehicles, limited visibility, red light running, and speeding through major intersections. For pedestrian projects, respondents strongly supported the proposed Class I shared-use facilities (Tamien Innu, Union Pacific Trail, and Lawrence Mitty Trail). For the Lawrence Mitty Trail, the community specifically noted the value of extending the shared-use path northward and into Santa Clara to improve school access. There was also broad support for the recommended sidewalk projects. Participants noted that safety issues at intersections become more pronounced during commuting hours due to the high volume of traffic. The intersections most frequently mentioned were those along Stevens Creek Boulevard, Bollinger Road, Prospect Road, Stelling Road, De Anza Boulevard, and Blaney Avenue. The community’s preferred pedestrian projects (the top-voted projects online and on outreach boards) were:
• Tamien Innu (Shared Use)
• Lawrence Mitty Trail (Shared Use)
• Blaney Ave and Stevens Creek Blvd (Typology A, B, C Intersection) • Union Pacific Trail (Shared Use)
• Pacifica Dr and Torre Ave (Typology A Intersection)
For bicycling, popular projects included upgrading bike lanes on corridors such as Homestead Road and Blaney Avenue, and addressing intersection safety issues along Stevens Creek Boulevard, especially near Highway 85 and De Anza College. The community’s preferred bicycle projects (the top-voted projects online and on outreach boards) were:
• Stevens Creek Blvd (Separated Bike Lanes)
• Blaney Ave (Buffered Bike Lanes)
• Homestead Rd (Buffered and Separated Bike Lanes)
• Bollinger Rd (Buffered Bike Lanes)
• Stelling Rd (Buffered and Separated Bike Lanes)
Overall, participants expressed support for enhanced network connections to schools and requested that some of the proposed buffered bike lanes be upgraded to separated bikeways to improve safety due to high-speed traffic. The corridors that received the most feedback included the recommended shared-use paths, as well as Homestead Road, Stevens Creek Boulevard, Blaney Avenue, and Bollinger Road. Many participants favored the suggested shared-use paths, expressing that they would provide safe alternatives to major roadways and intersections.

Concerns about speeding and unsafe intersections along Stevens Creek Boulevard were highlighted, particularly near Highway 85 and De Anza College. Separated bikeways were supported on Foothill Boulevard, Stelling Road, and Wolfe Road. Most unique comments were regarding the recommended neighborhood bike routes, with overall support for the enhanced neighborhood network serving schools.
16 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
16 of 2882
5 Across both pedestrian and bicycle projects, recurring priorities were improving safety for students travelling to schools (Lincoln Elementary, Monta Vista High, and Cupertino High were referenced the most), implementing traffic calming and speed-reduction measures on local streets (speed tables, RRFBs, and when legally permissible implementing automated speed enforcement measures), strengthening connectivity between parks, schools, and neighborhoods, and improving intersection safety.

Commission and Council Feedback - Fall 2025
Following Phase 1, the ATP was taken to the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission, Planning Commission, and City Council to solicit feedback on the ATP and the draft project prioritization criteria. Based on the Council's direction and the Commissions’ feedback, staff revised both the draft prioritization criteria and draft programmatic recommendations to address comments from the three bodies. Additionally, staff prepared two new guideline documents to accompany the ATP, which will be applied to new ATP projects to better evaluate potential project impacts and project effectiveness.

A review of the Commission and Council feedback showed clear consensus among the Commissions and the Council regarding each body’s comments on the ATP and the draft project prioritization criteria. These areas of agreement were:
• Safety should be prioritized, especially near schools and on the Vision Zero HIN. • Scoring criteria should emphasize objective, data-based measures, and Fairness should be removed as a criterion.
• Support for improving future decision-making with more robust data collection. • Technology solutions need greater emphasis.

Specifically, on August 20, 2025, the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission provided the following comments to staff:
• The Commission emphasized considering road maintenance before approving new projects.
• Concerns were raised about including public likes and dislikes in the evaluation process, and it was suggested that they be treated cautiously.
• Calls were made to ensure decisions are based on data, and to avoid penalizing projects that involve parking or lane removal, as those decisions should be left to the City Council. • There was strong support for prioritizing safety, with extra points suggested for projects near schools and along high-injury corridors.
• The evolving nature of the City was acknowledged, with a push to ensure plans address both current and future needs, particularly in growing residential areas.

On September 9, 2025, the Planning Commission provided feedback to staff through the following motion:
17 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
17 of 2882
6 • Access Criteria: Award fifteen points if within one-half mile of a school and include senior housing and senior facilities in the “Parks & Other Destinations Proximity” definition. • Sustainability/Connectivity Criteria: Rename “Sustainability” to “Connectivity” and award ten points for being within one-quarter mile of a trail or low-stress facility, raising the section maximum to twenty points.
• Balance Criteria: Subtract five points if five or more regularly used parking spaces are removed and subtract fifteen points if a car lane is eliminated for ten percent or more of the project length.
• Fairness Criteria: Delete this criterion as it is subjective, unmeasurable, and likely to increase community divisiveness.
• Additional ATP Recommendations: Improve high-injury intersections with cameras, evaluate adaptive right-turn-on-red technology, conduct baseline bike counts, and partner with multiple providers for routine bike education.

On November 4, 2025, the City Council provided the following feedback to staff through the following motion, during which Vice Mayor Moore made a friendly amendment to add grant funding (Mayor Chao and Councilmember Wang accepted the friendly amendment). • Drop “Public Input” from ranking criteria since it’s not objective and unreliable. • Remove Fairness as a ranking criterion, as the CIP adoption process will address that. • Add “Cost-efficiency (user impact)” to ranking criteria - low cost, high impact projects should have high priority; and grant funding.
• Add impact to vehicular traffic to arterial streets as a ranking criterion to subtract points. • Add and prioritize technology solutions such as sensor-driven pedestrian and bicyclist detection
o Safe driving technology – speed feedback signs, red light cameras • Need input from drivers on dangerous points.
• School crossing - needs traffic management too, in addition to bike and ped infrastructure. • Need data:
o Longer trip data from cell phone data, in addition to short trip data o Project list generated
o Data for De Anza Buffered Bike Lane collected so far. o Hopper data
o TDM data from Apple
Responses to Commission and Council Feedback - Fall 2025 Staff addressed the comments specifically related to the draft prioritization criteria by:
• Modifying the scoring for the HIN and High Injury Intersections (HII) to give greater consideration to projects along the HIN/HII or locations in close proximity. • Modifying School Proximity scoring so that Suggested Routes to School is the chosen metric, rather than a distance-based proximity score for schools. This is more precise and appropriate, as it specifically addresses safety on known walking and biking routes to school.
• Adding senior facilities to the Destinations proximity for scoring. • Creating a new project category for transportation technology. 18 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
18 of 2882
7 • Removing the Fairness criterion so that all metrics are based on objective data. • Adding additional negative scoring for projects that impact Cupertino arterials. • Adding cost effectiveness as a scoring criterion.

Staff revised the criteria tables, which are included in Attachment B, and the draft project scores based on the revised criteria are listed in Attachment C.

Staff addressed general comments on the ATP by creating a new project category for technology, developing two guideline documents to apply to the new ATP network recommendations during project delivery, and making minor revisions to the programmatic recommendations (Attachment D). These changes include:
• The creation of a new project category for transportation technology, so that technology solutions are grouped into corridors and equally ranked against traditional network recommendations, not just listed as programmatic recommendations. This new project category is titled Transportation Technology Corridors. • A Project Impact Evaluation Memo (Attachment E), which lays out the approach for comprehensively assessing project impacts and a path for project delivery when the full extent of parking or roadway impacts is discovered during design. • A Project Effectiveness Memo (Attachment F), which describes how the City can better evaluate long-term project effectiveness.
• Minor edits to the programmatic recommendations to better reflect the character of Cupertino and address comments received during public hearings.

The first major revision to the ATP following the last Planning Commission review in September was the addition of a new project category, Transportation Technology Corridors. This new category addresses the community’s desire and the Council's direction to prioritize technology.

To achieve this, transportation technologies were added to the ATP network recommendations as standalone corridor projects rather than as programmatic elements as previously identified.

Staff began by reviewing Typology C intersection recommendations (intersection signal and control changes) located at Cupertino-owned signalized intersections and evaluated their overlap with the Vision Zero HIN. Following this exercise, staff analyzed collision data to identify corridors with higher collision rates where “unsafe speed” is listed as the primary collision factor, or where collisions occurred due to traffic signal or sign violations. Lastly, corridors and the intersections along them were screened for implementation feasibility to determine appropriate Technology Corridors. This process helped staff select five corridors that would benefit most from transportation technologies, based on collision history and the City’s ability to control and implement different technologies. These corridors are:
• De Anza Blvd: From Homestead Rd to Prospect Rd
• Stevens Creek Blvd: From Foothill Blvd to Wolfe Rd
• Homestead Rd: From De Anza Blvd to Tantau Ave
• Wolfe/ Miller Rd: From Homestead Rd to Calle de Barcelona • Stelling Rd: From I-280 to Rainbow Dr
19 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
19 of 2882
8 Technology solutions in this project category could include red-light cameras, speed-enforcement cameras (when legally permissible), adaptive detection for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists, and audible pedestrian detection. Transportation Technology Corridor projects will be treated the same as traditional network recommendations, and their scores will be normalized against bicycle, pedestrian intersection, and sidewalk projects. Technology Corridors will be ranked in the final project list alongside all other project types.

The next notable change is the addition of two new guideline documents to be presented to Council for consideration. These guidelines aim to address two commonly heard themes from the community, Commissions, and Council related to the need to better consider project tradeoffs before construction and to collect more data on ridership resulting from bicycle improvement projects. These two memos (Attachments E and F) describe the approach that staff will follow for new ATP network recommendations.

For evaluating project impacts, the Project Impact Evaluation Memo (Attachment E) states that following the Council-approved initiation of any new ATP project, and when parking or traffic impacts are identified during the preliminary engineering (30% design) phase, staff will return to the City Council to present the 30% design, identified impacts, and potential trade-offs. At that meeting, the Council will determine whether the project should undergo a detailed impact analysis tailored to its specific impacts. This level of analysis requires a degree of design detail that is available only once the 30% design phase has been completed.

A 30% level of design is necessary to evaluate traffic and parking impacts with technical accuracy because traffic analysis tools, such as Synchro, TransCAD, Cube, or Inrix-based models, require defined lane assignments, turn pockets, signal phasing, parking layouts, and other project features to produce meaningful estimates of delay, queues, diversion patterns, and parking utilization. Additionally, tying the analysis to the identification of parking or traffic impacts at 30% ensures that funding is focused on projects that clearly reveal meaningful operational or parking impacts, rather than expending significant resources on every concept in the ATP, regardless of its risk profile. A description of the potential scope and cost estimates for that work is included in Attachment 4.

The second draft guideline document (Attachment F) describes the process by which the City will use data to measure the success of new network recommendations in the ATP. This approach exclusively applies to Class II (striped bicycle lane), Class IIB (buffered bicycle lane), and Class IV (protected bicycle lane) bicycle facilities. The goal of this approach is to ensure that transportation projects identified in the ATP and completed through the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) are successful in furthering the City’s stated goals.

The ATP advances City objectives for traffic safety and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, consistent with the Council-adopted Vision Zero Action Plan and Climate Action Plan. The City’s Vision Zero Action Plan calls for eliminating serious and fatal collisions by 2040, and the Climate Action Plan seeks to reduce vehicle trips and their associated emissions in part by shifting short driving trips to walking, biking, and transit.
20 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
20 of 2882
9 To demonstrate progress toward these objectives, staff must track the number of people using new facilities and the safety of those facilities over time. This proposed evaluation approach will allow the City to answer basic but important questions, such as whether these projects encourage the use of active transportation modes, whether collision rates are decreasing even as ridership increases, and, potentially, which types of improvements deliver the greatest benefits.

Historically, due to the costly nature of this work, city staff has relied on occasional spot counts or project-specific traffic studies, which provide only short snapshots of bicycle and pedestrian volumes. To fully measure the effect of new ATP projects, staff proposes establishing an approach that combines a one-time citywide baseline count effort along with project-specific before-andafter counts for certain bikeway projects. This effort will require the purchase or lease of bike-ped counting equipment and, potentially, the associated analytics software, so bicycle and pedestrian activity can be measured in a repeatable way.

Staff recommends that the first action of the ATP should be to conduct a comprehensive snapshot baseline bicycle and pedestrian count at ATP priority project locations. This initial effort would record how many people are currently biking (and walking, where feasible). Following completion of the baseline count, for individual bikeway projects approved by the Council, staff proposes a before-and-after evaluation approach for Class II, Class IIB, and Class IV bikeways.

Upon Council approval of project initiation, staff would begin a pre-construction data collection period at the project site. This establishes a clear pre-project picture of both ridership and safety.

After the project is constructed, staff would then repeat this process for post-construction. With these two datasets, staff can calculate changes in average daily and peak-period bicycle volumes, as well as changes in collision rates. The key metric will not just be the number of collisions, but collisions relative to the number of bicyclists or pedestrians. A successful project would be one in which more people use the facility while the collision rate per bicyclist or pedestrian remains the same or decreases. This will be referred to as the Safety Plus Mode Shift (SPMS) rate, which aligns with Vision Zero and Climate Action Plan objectives.

These draft guidelines are intended to improve transparency and accountability around new active transportation projects. It also provides Council with a way to compare projects and project types, allows designs to be refined based on what works best in practice, and creates a feedback loop between adopted policy goals and real-world outcomes. By committing to these approaches, the City can signal that success is defined not only by miles of bikeway delivered, but by thoughtful design and quantifiable improvements in safety and mode shift toward sustainable transportation.

Commission and Community Feedback - Winter 2026
After incorporating the requested Commission and Council changes, the ATP was brought back to the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission and Planning Commission to gather feedback on the updated draft project list and draft guidelines.

A summary of the comments provided by the Planning Commission on February 10, 2026, and the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission on February 18, 2026, is included below. 21 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
21 of 2882
10 At the Planning Commission, the Commission noted that making small adjustments to individual scoring criteria could create a “whack-a-mole effect”, where changes unintentionally shift project rankings elsewhere. That said, there was general agreement that the Safety and School criteria could be refined to better elevate Vision Zero–related projects. Following prioritization, the discussion shifted to emergency response times and the design of Class IV separated bike lanes.

Commissioners acknowledged the importance of this issue but did not agree that these facilities universally worsen response times and concluded that the topic should be addressed through the Programmatic Recommendations in the ATP.

The Planning Commission provided comments on the ATP through the following individual straw polls:

Chair Kosolcharoen conducted a non-binding straw poll to have Council and staff consider the ways in which public safety response time can be incorporated into the project prioritization criteria. (Rao in favor; none opposed; no abstentions) Commissioner Lindskog conducted a non-binding straw poll to revisit the scoring system and put less weight on school routes and less weight on cost-effectiveness criteria to balance things out, and put more weight on intersections in High Injury Network, particularly the top twenty, and increase the ranking on Foothill Blvd. (Scharf, Kosolcharoen, Fung and Lindskog in favor; Rao opposed; no abstentions)
Chair Kosolcharoen conducted a non-binding straw poll to support incorporating emergency response times into programmatic recommendations. (Kosolcharoen, and Rao in favor; Scharf Fung, and Lindskog opposed; no abstentions)
Commissioner Fung conducted a non-binding straw poll to reinstate proximity to parks in addition to proximity to schools. (Kosolcharoen, Scharf, Fung and Lindskog in favor; Rao opposed; no abstentions)
Commissioner Rao conducted a non-binding straw poll to discard the criteria proposed and use the feedback provided at Council. (Rao in favor; Fung and Lindskog opposed; Kosolcharoen and Scharf abstained)
At the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission, a consistent theme was that the updated project prioritization criteria could be refined to elevate Vision Zero-related projects. Commissioners emphasized the importance of accounting for the High Injury Network, specifically by adding consideration of KSI locations or Intersections and Corridors of Concern (the top 7 intersections and corridors listed in the Vision Zero Action Plan). Many felt the School Proximity criteria may be over-weighted, and there was interest in shifting from individual project thinking toward clustering or zone strategies for future project delivery. Commissioners also noted that having to normalize scores due to the Balance criterion might cause confusion when reading the table, and this type of scoring could be simplified. Overall, the Commission was supportive of the presented Plan documents and agreed that the scoring system could be adjusted to elevate Vision Zero Corridors and Intersections of Concern in the project list. 22 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
22 of 2882
11 The BPC provided formal comments through the following motion:

MOTION: Chair Gerhard Eschelbeck moved, seconded by Vice Chair Munisekaran Madhdhipatla, to approve the ATP draft materials as presented today, with the following set of modifications.

1. Address the inequality or imbalance between the ranking of projects in the ATP and the Cupertino Vision Zero high injury network by reducing the max score for being on a safe route to school to 10 for all three matrices, reducing the goal max score for access from 30 to 20 and increase HIN max scoring to 30.

2. Eliminate 1.25 modifier by making balance in bicycle matrix to a negative score.

3. Consider ATP project clustering as appropriate for future ATP updates.

Responses to Commission Feedback - Winter 2026
As both the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission and Planning Commission felt that the Safe Routes to School scoring may be overweighting certain projects, staff informally rescored projects by adding an additional 10 points to projects located on the Vision Zero High Injury Network (for a new Max of 30 points) and limiting the max score for School Proximity to 10 points rather than the previous 20 points.

Since the two edits are directionally opposed, projects that score high on both criteria remain comparatively stable, while projects that rely disproportionately on only one of those criteria see the largest shifts. The results demonstrated that the strongest positive movement is concentrated among projects that received only the Vision Zero adjustment. These projects generally gained about 10 points and rose significantly on the list. The greatest negative movement concentrated among projects that received only the SR2S adjustment. Those projects generally lost about 10 points and fell substantially in rank, showing that reducing SR2S from 20 to 10 points has a stronger downward effect when it is not offset by a Vision Zero increase. Projects that received both edits tended to stay closer to their prior position and typically changed by less than 1 point, indicating that the +10 Vision Zero adjustment and the -10 SR2S adjustment largely offset one another.

Responses to Community Questions - Winter 2026
Following Commission review, staff also received community questions about how the recommended network facilities are defined and what construction treatments are envisioned for Neighborhood Routes (Class III) and Separated Bike Lanes (Class IV).

Where the ATP references Neighborhood Routes (shown on the map in Attachment H, in purple), these are envisioned as Class III bikeways that rely on wayfinding, speed tables, and other context-appropriate treatments rather than bike lane striping that is typically used on larger streets. An example of a Neighborhood Route would be Price Ave near Wilson Park or Greenleaf Dr between Stelling Rd and Beardon Dr. Creation of a Neighborhood Route would generally not require the removal of any on-street parking.

An ATP is a planning-level document that identifies project concepts and, for separated bike lanes, does not prescribe a single divider type to be used citywide, nor does it state 23 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
23 of 2882
12 that separated bikeways must only use concrete as the divider. The appropriate separation treatment (flexible delineators, raised median, planters, curb, or parking-protected design) is determined during subsequent project development and design, based on sitespecific context and constraints such as available right-of-way, drainage, driveway and intersection conditions, cost, and community and Council input.

As described in the attached Visual Glossary (Attachment H; also available on the project webpage and previously shared with the public during Phase 2 outreach), a separated bike lane is defined as “an on-street bike lane that is separated from motor vehicle traffic by a vertical barrier such as bollards, raised medians, planters, or parked cars.” The Recommendations Map illustrates bikeway classification and not its design features.

Similarly, intersection recommendations in the ATP are presented as conceptual typologies. Specific treatments at individual intersections will be selected and refined during design through engineering analysis and public engagement. The Visual Glossary provided during Phase 2 outreach remains the clearest summary of the pedestrian and bicycle improvement types that are referenced in the ATP.

What Comes Next?
Next steps for the ATP will include preparing a draft report for public review in the spring. After the public review period, staff will incorporate any needed revisions and bring the Draft Plan to the City Council for adoption in late June or early July.

Sustainability Impact
The Cupertino ATP will have positive sustainability impacts because the Plan will develop infrastructure improvement recommendations that increase safety and accessibility for all nonmotorized roadway users. Additionally, the ATP will include mode shift strategies to promote walking and bicycling to reduce personal automobile dependency, which will reduce local greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality. Overall, the ATP will help create a healthier, more sustainable community. The development and implementation of an Active Transportation Plan is a Transportation Measure (TR-1) in the Climate Action Plan (2022). • Measure TR-1: Develop and implement an Active Transportation Plan to achieve 15 percent of active transportation mode share by 2030 and 23 percent by 2040 Fiscal Impact
The ATP project is fully funded through the City's TDA3 direct allocation.

City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description
Yes, FY 24-25
Active Transportation Plan: This is a consolidation of existing and new transportation efforts that aim to further the goals outlined in the City’s Vision Zero Initiative, including:

18.1 Review and update bike plan

18.2 Review and update pedestrian plan
24 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
24 of 2882
13 18.3 Review current Complete Streets Policy and propose adjustments to create a better interface between all modes of transportation
Council Goal:

Transportation, Environmental Sustainability
California Environmental Quality Act
The project is not subject to CEQA.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Matthew Schroeder, Senior Transportation Planner Reviewed by: Chad Mosley, Public Works Director
David Stillman, Transportation Manager
Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager
Attachments:

A – November 04, 2025, City Council Staff Report
B – Revised Project Prioritization Criteria
C – Draft Prioritized Project List
D – Revised Program and Policy Recommendations
E – Draft Project Impact Evaluation Guidelines
F – Draft Project Effectiveness Guidelines
G – Draft Network Recommendations Maps
H – Visual Glossary
25 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
25 of 2882

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: November 4, 2025
Subject
An update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan, including a summary of Phase 1 activities and an overview of what to expect during Phase 2.

Recommended Action
Receive an update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan and provide feedback on the draft project prioritization criteria.

Background
With substantial progress already made on the implementation of recommended projects from the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan and the 2018 Pedestrian Transportation Plan, a new, comprehensive Active Transportation Plan (ATP) was necessary to build on those improvements and address evolving community needs. Staff also recognized the importance of creating a unified, citywide plan to align bicycle and pedestrian initiatives while accounting for the needs of motorized vehicles. This coordinated approach ensures consistency across policies and projects, avoiding duplication, aligning initiatives, and addressing overlapping concerns.

On April 4, 2023, the City Council approved the FY 23/24 City Work Program (CWP), which identified the ATP as an item “to be considered” for inclusion in the following year’s work program. The City Council approved the FY 24/25 CWP on April 3, 2024, with the ATP included as an approved project. City staff then identified Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA3) funds as an external funding source to support the development of the Plan. With funding secured, staff advertised a Request for Proposals for consultant services to assist in developing the Plan. On December 3, 2024, the City Council authorized the City Manager to award a contract to Alta Planning + Design, Inc., for development of the Active Transportation Plan.

Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options
Phase 1 of the Plan occurred between March and June 2025. It included policy review, community outreach and input, and analysis to develop data-driven project recommendations. 26 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
26 of 2882
The first step of Phase 1 was developing a Plan Review Memo to ensure the ATP is consistent with and supports local and regional policies, including Cupertino plans like the General Plan’s Mobility Element and Vision Zero Action Plan, the Countywide Active Transportation Plan, and other relevant documents.

Building on that policy context, the project team then conducted a Needs Assessment, supported by an Existing Conditions Review. These documents examined the City’s transportation network in detail, identifying where walkers and bikers feel stressed or disconnected. Analyses such as Active Trip Potential and Level of Traffic Stress were applied to estimate how many short driving trips could realistically shift to walking or biking. Together, these data-driven methods established a clear picture of where gaps are greatest and where investments could have a significant community impact.

In parallel with the analysis work, staff reached out to the community to learn what destinations they want to travel to and what barriers prevent them from walking or biking.

Between March and June 2025, the City held 12 outreach events, engaged with more than 1,300 residents and gathered close to 3,000 individual comments. Residents expressed consistent concerns about safety on the Vision Zero High-Injury Network, the need for improved connectivity between neighborhoods and schools, the need to consider the potential project impacts to drivers, and the importance of designing facilities that are for people of all ages and abilities. Feedback from the community helped validate the technical analysis, and together these two sources informed project recommendations. All the outreach performed in Phase 1 is summarized in the Public Participation Memo, which is available on the City’s project webpage.

Phase 1 also resulted in a Vision, Goals, and Objectives Memo. This document captured the shared vision that Cupertino should be a community where walking, biking, and rolling are easy, safe, and comfortable for everyone. The ATP’s vision, goals, and objectives were developed by consolidating similar and overlapping statements from existing Cupertino plans and then refined using the input gathered during Phase 1 outreach to also reflect today's community needs and concerns. The community ranked these goals in order of importance, as shown below:

1. Safety: Consistent with the Vision Zero Action Plan, pursue an active transportation network that reduces the number of serious and fatal crashes involving pedestrians, bicyclists, and other active transportation users to zero. Enact measures to anticipate human error and minimize the impact of traffic crashes for all roadway users.

2. Accessibility: Provide a well-connected multimodal transportation network that offers comfortable and convenient walking and biking options to key destinations for all residents and visitors in the City.

3. Maintenance: Active transportation needs should be considered and integrated in all City roadway maintenance activities.

4. Sustainability: Advance environmental quality and economic prosperity for the City by providing inviting active transportation facilities that encourage frequent usage and 27 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
27 of 2882
improve adoption of all non-vehicle modes of travel, resulting in a reduction in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHGs).

5. Multimodal Balance: Consider multimodal priorities and impacts of all projects to improve sustainable transportation options throughout the City. Limit impacts to all other modes whenever possible, including transit and personal vehicles.

6. Fairness: Provide a multimodal transportation system that is equally distributed across all neighborhoods in Cupertino.

In alignment with the Plan goals, draft project prioritization criteria were developed to assist in ranking the projects identified in the Plan. This ranking will occur following Phase 2 public outreach once the public has evaluated and commented on the recommended projects. The criteria were selected to align with community goals and VTA Measure B funding requirements. These criteria are being presented to the Commissions and Council for review and public comment. The draft project prioritization criteria (Attachment A) include the following metrics to rank recommended projects:
• Collision History
• Stress Level
• School Proximity
• High Frequency Transit Proximity
• Parks & Other Destination Proximity
• Active Trip Potential
• Roadway Impact
• Public Input
Next Steps
As Cupertino transitions into Phase 2 of the project, public engagement will continue throughout this stage, with opportunities for residents to review and comment on the draft project recommendations. The outcome will be a comprehensive, actionable Active Transportation Plan that the City Council can consider for adoption by spring 2026. All Phase 1 deliverables and Phase 2 outreach information can be found on the City’s project webpage at www.cupertino.gov/atp.
28 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
28 of 2882
Sustainability Impact
The Cupertino ATP will have positive sustainability impacts because the Plan will develop infrastructure improvement recommendations that increase safety and accessibility for all nonmotorized roadway users. Additionally, the ATP will include mode shift strategies to promote walking and bicycling to reduce personal automobile dependency, which will reduce local greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality. Overall, the ATP will help create a healthier, more sustainable community.

Fiscal Impact
The project is fully funded through the City's TDA3 direct allocation in budget unit100-88-844 750-243.

City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description
Yes, FY 24-25
Active Transportation Plan: This is a consolidation of existing and new transportation efforts aiming to further goals outlined in the City’s Vision Zero Initiative, including:

18.1 Review and update bike plane

18.2 Review and update pedestrian plan

18.3 Review current Complete Streets Policy and propose adjustments to create a better interface between all modes of transportation
Council Goal:

Transportation
California Environmental Quality Act
No California Environmental Quality Act impact.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Matthew Schroeder, Senior Transit and Transportation Planner Reviewed by: David Stillman, Transportation Manager
Chad Mosley, Public Works Director
Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, Interim City Manager Attachments:

A – Draft Project Prioritization Criteria
29 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
29 of 2882
City of Cupertino | 1
To: David Stillman, Transportation Manager, City of Cupertino Matthew Schroeder, Senior Transportation Planner, City of Cupertino From: Christopher Kidd, Alta Planning + Design
Date: December 10, 2025
Re: Cupertino ATP: Project Prioritization Criteria
Introduction
Proposed improvements will prioritize the development of a complete active transportation network that imposes fair outcomes, safety, access, and comfort for people of all ages and abilities. Draft criteria were originally proposed in the Summer of 2025, with criteria screened with the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission, Planning Commission, and City Council in the Fall of 2025 for their input. Following input from these bodies, prioritization criteria were updated to better reflect feedback.

Criteria for prioritization have been aligned with the Goals of the Active Transportation Plan:
- Safety
- Access
- Sustainability
- Multimodal Balance
- Cost Effectiveness
Projects will be scored according to their corresponding tables below, then scores will be normalized to create a unified set of scores for a single project list.

Project Type Maximum Score Score modifier Consolidated list maximum score
Bicycle Network
Recommendations
100 1x
100
Pedestrian Intersection
Recommendations
80 1.25x
Pedestrian Sidewalk
Recommendations
80 1.25x
Transportation Technology
Corridor Recommendations
90 1.11x
30 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
30 of 2882
City of Cupertino | 2
Table 1: Bicycle Network Project Prioritization Matrix
Goal Criteria Metric (Source) Scoring Max
Score
Goal Max
Score
Safety
Collision History Roadway segment is near a corridor identified in the City of Cupertino Vision Zero Action Plan (2024) High Injury Network (HIN) 20 pts if on a HIN corridor
10 pts if within 1000 ft
0 pts if not
20 30
Stress Level Max score from bicycle level of stress analysis 10 pts: BLTS 4 5 pts: BLTS 3
0 pts: BLTS 2 or 1
10 Access
School Proximity Project is located along a SR2S suggested routes to school 20 pts if along a suggested route 0 pts if not 20
30 High Frequency
Transit Proximity Presence of major transit stops along the roadway 5 pts within 0.25 mile proximity to
major transit stops (VTA)
2 pts within 0.5 mile proximity to
major transit stops (VTA)
0 pts if not.
5 Parks & Other
Destination
Proximity
Presence of parks, the library, senior center/facilities and shopping centers along the roadway
Scale 0 to 5 pts based on # of
destinations within 0.5 mile per
mile of project length. 5
Sustainability
Active Trip Potential Roadway has high bicycle trip potential or high e-bike trip potential
Scale 0 to 5 pts based on average
ATP score 5
10 SAST Gap Score Project is within a high gap score area Scale 0 to 5 pts based on average gap score
5 Balance
General Roadway
Impact
Potential need for lane reduction or parking removal based upon aerial imagery
10 pts if no parking removal or lane
reduction is needed to implement
project
0 pts if needed to implement
project
10 20
Arterial Roadway
Impact
Potential need for lane reduction or parking removal based upon aerial imagery
10 Cost
Effectiveness Fiscal Responsibility Project cost
10 pts if below $500k
5 pts if $500k - $2M
0 pts if over $2M
10 10
31 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
31 of 2882
Recommendation Development Approach and Data
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. 3 City of Cupertino
Table 2: Pedestrian Intersection Project Prioritization Matrix Goal Criteria Metric (Source) Scoring Max
Score
Goal Max
Score
Safety
Collision History Roadway segment is near a corridor identified in the City of Cupertino Vision Zero Action Plan (2024) High Injury Network (HIN) 20 pts if on a HIN corridor
10 pts if within 1000 ft
0 pts if not
20 30
Stress Level Max score from pedestrian level of stress analysis 10 pts: PLTS 4 5 pts: PLTS 3
0 pts: PLTS 2 or 1
10 Access
School Proximity Project is located along a SR2S suggested routes to school 20 pts if along a suggested route 0 pts if not 20
30 High Frequency Transit
Proximity Presence of major transit stops along the roadway 5 pts within 0.25 mile proximity to
major transit stops (VTA)
2 pts within 0.5 mile proximity to
major transit stops (VTA)
0 pts if not.
5 Parks & Other Destination
Proximity
Presence of parks, the library, senior center/facilities and shopping centers along the roadway
Scale 0 to 5 pts based on # of
destinations within 0.5 mile
5 Sustainability
Active Trip Potential Roadway has high active pedestrian trip potential Scale 0 to 5 pts based on average ATP score 5
10 SAST Gap Score Project is within a high gap score area Scale 0 to 5 pts based on average gap score
5 Cost
Effectiveness Fiscal Responsibility Project cost
10 pts if below $500k
5 pts if $500k - $2M
0 pts if over $2M
10 10
32 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
32 of 2882
Recommendation Development Approach and Data
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. 4 City of Cupertino
Table 3: Pedestrian Sidewalk Projects Prioritization Matrix Goal Criteria Metric (Source) Scoring Max
Score
Goal Max
Score
Safety
Collision History Roadway segment is near a corridor identified in the City of Cupertino Vision Zero Action Plan (2024) High Injury Network (HIN) 20 pts if on a HIN corridor
10 pts if within 1000 ft
0 pts if not
20 30
Stress Level Max score from pedestrian and bicycle level of stress analysis 10 pts: PLTS 4
5 pts: PLTS 3
0 pts: PLTS 2 or 1
10 Access
School Proximity Project is located along a SR2S suggested routes to school 20 pts if along a suggested route 0 pts if not 20
30 High Frequency Transit
Proximity Presence of major transit stops along the roadway 5 pts within 0.25 mile proximity to
major transit stops (VTA)
2 pts within 0.5 mile proximity to
major transit stops (VTA)
0 pts if not.
5 Parks & Other
Destination Proximity
Presence of parks, the library, senior center/facilities and shopping centers along the roadway
Scale 0 to 5 pts based on # of
destinations within 0.5 mile. 5
Sustainability
Active Trip Potential Roadway has high active trip potential Scale 0 to 5 pts based on average ATP score
5 10
SAST Gap Score Project is within a high gap score area Scale 0 to 5 pts based on average gap score
5 Cost
Effectiveness Fiscal Responsibility Project cost
10 pts if below $500k
5 pts if $500k - $2M
0 pts if over $2M
10 10
33 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
33 of 2882
Recommendation Development Approach and Data
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. 5 City of Cupertino
Table 4: Transportation Technology Corridors Prioritization Matrix Goal Criteria Metric (Source) Scoring Max
Score
Goal
Max
Score
Safety
Collision History
The corridor includes an intersection identified as a
VZAP High Injury Network Intersection
4 pts for every intersection ranked 1-7 in the corridor 2 pts: if 7-24
0 pts: 24-48
10 40
Collision History # of collisions with a cause of "unsafe speed" per mile (according to Cupertino Vision Zero Dashboard Data)
Scale 0 to 5 pts based on percentage of total collisions on the corridor (last 5 yrs) by # of collisions with a cause of “unsafe speed”.
10 Collision History
# of collisions with a cause of "traffic signals and signs" per mile (according to Cupertino Vision Zero
Dashboard Data)
Scale 0 to 5 pts based on percentage of total collisions on the corridor (last 5 yrs) by # of collisions with a cause of “traffic signals and signs”. 10
Level of Traffic
Stress Average PLTS for the corridor
10 pts: PLTS 4
5 pts: PLTS 3
0 pts: PLTS 2 or 1
10 Access
School Proximity % of corridor length on Suggested Route to School 20 pts: >75% of length on Suggested Route
10 pts: 25–75%
0 pts: <25% 20
30 Parks & Other
Destination
Proximity
Presence of parks, the library, senior center/facilities and shopping centers along the corridor
Scale 0 to 10 pts based on # of within .25 miles of corridor per mile of project length.
10 Sustainability
Active Trip Potential Average bicycle/e-bike short-trip share intersecting the corridor
Scale 0 to 10 based on average ATP score for bicycle/e-bike 10 20
SAST Gap Score % of corridor length within high SAST gap-score areas Scale 0 to 10 based on average gap score 10 34 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
34 of 2882
Pedestrian Bicycle
Shared Use Technology
W/
Changes
Type/ Mode Description Location Cross St A Cross St B Safety Access Sustainability Balance Cost Final Rank New Rank Pedestrian A Intersection De Anza Blvd Lazaneo Dr 30 25 6 0 10 90 1 1 Pedestrian C Intersection De Anza Blvd Rodrigues Ave 30 27 5 0 10 89 2 2 Pedestrian A Intersection Stelling Rd Pepper Tree Ln 25 28 7 0 10 88 3 3 Pedestrian C Intersection De Anza Blvd Mariani Ave 30 20 6 0 10 83 4 4 Pedestrian B Intersection Stelling Rd Alves Dr 20 28 7 0 10 82 5 5 Pedestrian B, C Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd Stelling Rd 25 28 7 0 5 81 6 6 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Vista Dr Stevens Creek Blvd Forest Ave 20 23 8 20 10 81 7 7 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Forest Ave Blaney Ave De Anza Blvd 20 25 5 20 10 81 8 8 Shared Use Crossing
Stevens Creek
Undercrossing
(Feasibility Study)
Stevens Creek Trail Linda Vista Trail 25 25 0 20 10 80 9 9 Pedestrian C Intersection Vallco Pkwy Wolfe Rd 25 23 6 0 10 80 10 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Tantau Ave Bollinger Rd Stevens Creek Blvd 25 20 5 20 10 80 11 11 Shared Use Trail Tamien Innu Vallco Pkwy Don Burnett Bridge 30 25 4 20 0 79 12 12 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Blaney Ave John Dr 25 24 4 0 10 78 13 14 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Terry Way Rodrigues Ave Shelly Dr 10 25 6 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Shelly Dr Terry Way Bonny Dr 10 23 6 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Pepper Tree Ln Stelling Rd Bonny Dr 25 26 8 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Bonny Dr Pepper Tree Ln McClellan Rd 20 27 6 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Rodrigues Ave De Anza Blvd Terry Way 20 24 6 20 10 Shared Use Trail Lawrence Mitty Trail Stevens Creek Blvd Barnhart Ave 30 20 8 20 0 78 15 16 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stelling Rd Jollyman Ln Lilac Way 30 20 5 0 5 75 16 19 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Blaney Ave Rodrigues Ave 20 25 5 0 10 75 17 20 Pedestrian A Intersection Miller Ave Phil Ln 25 23 2 0 10 75 18 21 Pedestrian C Intersection Miller Ave Calle De Barcelona 25 23 2 0 10 75 19 22 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd Cupertino Rd 25 24 1 0 10 75 20 23

DRAFT PRIORITIZATION RESULTS - PROJECT LIST
These prioritization results present the draft project list using the scoring adjustments recommended by the City Council and Commissions in fall 2025. The “W/Changes” column shows the new rank after applying the additional scoring adjustment recommendations made by the Commissions in winter 2026. This removes 10 points from the max score for Schools (a change from 20 to 10) and adds points to the High Injury Network, so the new max increases from 20 to 30. These changes do not affect the Transportation Technology Corridors, which were evaluated using a separate set of criteria. Rank changes for those projects were not included in this review and should be assumed to remain generally similar. As a result, Column “W/Changes” includes rankings for 198 projects rather than 202.

For bicycle projects made up of multiple segments, scores were averaged using a length-weighted approach. Each segment’s score was scaled based on its share of the total project length. For example, if a segment makes up 33% of the overall project length, it contributes 33% of the total project score. These grouped projects are bracketed at the top and bottom in the spreadsheet for easier review.

Because each project type used different evaluation criteria, all projects were normalized to a 1–100 scale. Projects are grouped by type to make clear which scoring criteria were applied. Shared-use paths were scored using the bicycle criteria in response to repeated community requests to support all-ages-and-abilities design and strengthen off-street route options.

Scores are rounded to the nearest whole number may not sum exactly to the final score.

Project Type Legend
Project Location Criteria Current
Score
78 14 31
35 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
35 of 2882
W/
Changes
Type/ Mode Description Location Cross St A Cross St B Safety Access Sustainability Balance Cost Final Rank New Rank Project Location Criteria Current
Score
Pedestrian A, B Intersection McClellan Rd Clubhouse Ln 25 24 0 0 10 74 21 25 Shared Use Trail Union Pacific
Railroad Trail Prospect Rd Stevens Creek Blvd 30 22 2 20 0 74 22 26 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Flora Vista Ave Greenleaf Dr 20 26 3 0 10 74 23 29 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd Blaney Ave 25 24 5 0 5 74 24 30 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd Portal Ave 25 23 5 0 5 73 25 32 Bicycle Bike Lane Mariani Ave Bandley Dr De Anza Blvd 25 23 5 10 10 73 26 33 Pedestrian B Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd Phar Lap Dr 25 23 1 0 10 73 27 34 Pedestrian B Intersection Stelling Rd Huntridge Ln 25 20 3 0 10 73 28 35 Pedestrian B, C Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd Torre Ave 20 27 6 0 5 73 29 36 Pedestrian C Intersection Stelling Rd Hazelbrook Dr 20 25 3 0 10 72 30 37 Pedestrian C Intersection Bubb Rd McClellan Rd 25 21 2 0 10 72 31 38 Bicycle Separated Bikeway Finch Ave Phil Ln Stevens Creek Blvd 30 20 7 10 5 72 32 40 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Hyde Ave Shadygrove Dr Bollinger Rd 25 20 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Shadygrove Dr Hyde Ave Stendhal Ln 10 20 3 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Phil Ln Finch Ave Stendhal Ln 15 25 3 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Stendhal Ln Shadygrove Dr Phil Ln 15 20 3 20 10 Pedestrian A Intersection Stelling Rd Gardena Dr 20 24 3 0 10 71 34 42 Technology Transportation
Technology Corridor Stevens Creek Blvd Foothill Blvd Miller Ave/Wolfe Rd 32 20 12 0 0 71 35 N/A Pedestrian A, B Intersection Bubb Rd Columbus Ave 25 21 1 0 10 71 36 43 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Linda Vista Dr McClellan Rd Hyannisport Dr 20 21 2 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Hyannisport Dr Linda Vista Dr Bubb Rd 20 20 2 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Fort Baker Dr Hyannisport Dr Presidio Dr 10 21 2 20 10 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) McClellan Rd Byrne Ave Orange Ave 25 24 2 0 5 71 38 44 Shared Use Crossing Carmen Rd Bridge Carmen Rd Stevens Creek Blvd 25 24 1 20 0 70 39 45 Pedestrian A Intersection September Dr McClellan Rd 20 21 4 0 10 70 40 47 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Prince Ave Blaney Ave Portal Ave 20 1 5 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Portal Ave Stevens Creek Blvd Wintergreen Dr 25 21 5 20 10 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Bollinger Rd Hyde Ave 25 21 4 0 5 69 42 50 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) S Tantau Ave Anne Ln Stevens Creek Blvd 25 21 4 0 5 69 43 52 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Festival Dr Stelling Rd Festival Dr Dead End 10 21 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Orograde Pl Stelling Rd Festival Dr 25 22 4 20 10 Shared Use Two Way Path Festival Dr Festival Dr Festival Dr Dead End 15 21 2 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Festival Dr September Dr Festival Dr Dead End 10 20 2 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route September Dr McClellan Rd Festival Dr 20 20 4 20 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Lazaneo Dr Bandley Dr De Anza Blvd 25 6 8 20 10 69 45 13 Pedestrian A Intersection Blaney Ave Wheaton Dr 20 22 3 0 10 69 46 55 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stevens Creek Blvd Tantau Ave Judy Ave 25 21 4 0 5 68 47 56 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Flora Vista Ave Greenleaf Dr Lavina Ct 20 26 3 0 5 68 48 57 Pedestrian A Intersection Torre Ave Pacifica Dr 15 25 5 0 10 68 49 97 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Forest Ave Blaney Ave 20 22 3 0 10 68 50 58 Pedestrian A Intersection N Portal Ave Merritt Dr 20 22 3 0 10 68 51 59 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Carmen Rd - Scenic
Blvd Stevens Creek Blvd Scenic Cir Pathway 20 20 0 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route San Fernando Ave Orange Ave Blackberry Farm 10 21 2 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Janice Ave Stevens Creek Blvd Carmen Rd 15 20 1 20 10 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Calvert Dr Loree Ave 20 20 3 0 10 67 52 62 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Blaney Ave Pear Tree Ln 20 21 3 0 10 67 53 63 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Greenleaf Dr Stelling Rd Glencoe Dr 20 25 3 0 5 67 54 68 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Greenleaf Dr 360' East of Stelling Rd 520' West of Beardon Dr 20 25 3 0 5 67 55 69
Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Greenleaf Dr Ann Arbor Ave Flora Vista Ave 20 26 2 0 5 66 56 75 Pedestrian A Intersection Alves Dr De Anza Blvd 30 6 6 0 10 66 57 15 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Bandley Dr Valley Green Dr Stevens Creek Blvd 25 5 5 20 10 66 58 18 Bicycle Separated Bikeway N Blaney Ave Homestead Rd Beekman Pl 25 20 4 10 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane N Blaney Ave Bollinger Rd Beekman Pl 25 20 4 10 5 Bicycle Separated Bikeway N Stelling Rd Homestead Rd Gardena Dr 25 5 4 10 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane N Stelling Rd Garden Gate Dr Gardena Dr 25 25 6 10 5 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Scofield Dr Western Dr De Anza Blvd 30 10 7 0 5 65 61 17 Pedestrian A, C Intersection Linda Vista Dr McClellan Rd 20 25 2 0 5 64 62 77 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Bubb Rd Edward Way Vai Ave 25 21 1 0 5 64 63 78 Pedestrian A Intersection Terry Way Rodrigues Ave 10 26 5 0 10 63 64 105 Pedestrian A Intersection Bonny Dr Sola St 10 26 5 0 10 63 65 106 Pedestrian A Intersection Stendhal Ln Phil Ln 15 23 3 0 10 63 66 108 Pedestrian A Intersection Forest Ave Randy Ln 10 24 6 0 10 63 67 109 41 69
68 65
46 76
37 51
60 28
44 59
80 49
82 65
69 71
3372 73
36 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
36 of 2882
W/
Changes
Type/ Mode Description Location Cross St A Cross St B Safety Access Sustainability Balance Cost Final Rank New Rank Project Location Criteria Current
Score
Pedestrian B, C Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd De Anza Blvd 30 9 6 0 5 62 68 24 Bicycle Separated Bikeway Foothill Blvd Stevens Creek Blvd Homestead Rd 20 20 2 10 10 62 69 103 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Richwood Dr Miller Ave 30 3 6 0 10 62 70 27 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Mary Ave 500' South of Lubec St 160' North of Point Reyes Ter 15 26 3 0 5 61 71 110
Pedestrian A Intersection Bixby Dr Portal Ave 10 24 5 0 10 61 72 113 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Foothill Blvd Stevens Creek Blvd 20 22 2 0 5 61 73 114 Bicycle Separated Bikeway Stevens Creek Blvd SR 85 Foothilll Blvd 30 25 2 0 0 Bicycle Separated Bikeway Stevens Creek Blvd De Anza Blvd SR 85 30 28 7 0 0 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Wunderlich Dr Barnhart Ave Johnson Ave 10 20 3 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Johnson Ave Wunderlich Dr Bollinger Rd 25 0 3 20 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Foothill Blvd Stevens Creek Blvd Santa Lucia Rd 20 20 0 10 10 60 76 107 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Merritt Dr Larry Way 15 21 2 0 10 60 77 115 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Homestead Rd De Anza Blvd 30 3 10 0 5 60 78 39 Pedestrian A Intersection Granada Ave Orange Ave 10 23 4 0 10 60 79 116 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Bubb Rd 230' South of Stevens Creek Blvd
1,200' North of Results
Way 30 6 6 0 5 59 80 41
Bicycle Neighborhood Route Ainsworth Dr Hartman Dr Varian Way 0 20 2 20 10 Shared Use Two Way Path Varian Park Path Varian Way Amelia Ct 15 21 1 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Amelia Ct Varian Park Crescent Rd 10 22 1 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Crescent Rd -
Hillcrest Rd Amelia Ct Cupertino rd 10 21 1 20 10
Bicycle Neighborhood Route Cupertino Rd Foothill Blvd Carmen Rd 10 21 1 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Carmen Rd Cupertino Rd Dead End 20 23 0 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Varian Way Ainsworth Dr Varian Park 0 22 1 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Starling Dr Foothill Blvd Chace Dr 10 20 3 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Chace Dr Starling Dr Hartman Dr 0 21 3 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Hartman Dr Chace Dr Ainsworth Dr 0 20 3 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Ann Arbor Ave Greenleaf Dr Lauretta Dr 10 23 1 20 5 Shared Use Two Way Path Memorial Park Path Memorial Park Alves St 15 7 10 20 5 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Ann Arbor Ct Christensen Dr Ann Arbor Ave 0 4 1 20 5 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Alves Dr Anton Way Bandley Dr 25 5 9 20 5 Shared Use Two Way Path Memorial Park Path Christensen Dr Mary Ave 15 6 6 20 5 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Torre Ave Town Center Ln 10 27 5 0 5 58 83 118 Pedestrian A Intersection Hyannisport Dr Linda Vista Dr 10 24 2 0 10 58 84 120 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Alderbrook Ln Creekside Park Bollinger Rd 25 0 2 20 10 57 85 64 Pedestrian B Intersection Ann Arbor Ave Greenleaf Dr 10 25 1 0 10 57 86 122 Bicycle Bike Lane Miller Ave Stevens Creek Blvd Calle De Barcelona 30 0 7 10 10 57 87 66 Pedestrian C Intersection De Anza Blvd I-280 30 3 2 0 10 57 88 48 Pedestrian A Intersection Wheaton Dr Portal Ave 10 23 3 0 10 57 89 123 Pedestrian B Intersection Bollinger Rd Miller Ave 30 1 4 0 10 56 90 51 Pedestrian B Intersection Hyde Ave Willowgrove Ln 10 21 4 0 10 56 91 124 Pedestrian B, C Intersection Bubb Rd Stevens Creek Blvd 30 6 4 0 5 56 92 53 Pedestrian A Intersection Palo Vista Rd Janice Ave 10 24 1 0 10 56 93 125 Pedestrian C Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd Blandley Dr 20 9 6 0 10 56 94 54 Pedestrian A Intersection Alderbrook Ln Atherwood Ave 10 23 2 0 10 56 95 128 Pedestrian A Intersection Foothill Blvd Voss Ave 10 23 1 0 10 56 96 129 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Palm Ave Foothill Blvd Scenic Blvd 10 20 0 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Lockwood Dr Voss Ave Stevens Creek Blvd 5 20 1 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Voss Ave Lockwood Dr Foothill Blvd 0 20 0 20 10 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection SR 85 Stevens Creek Blvd 30 5 4 0 5 55 98 60 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection SR 85 Stevens Creek Blvd 30 5 4 0 5 55 99 61 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Beardon Dr Dunbar Dr Greenleaf Dr 10 25 3 0 5 55 100 131 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Miller Ave Greenwood Dr 25 3 6 0 10 55 101 65 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Heatherwood Dr Tuscany Pl Colony Hills Ln 10 1 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Tuscany Pl Heatherwood Dr Jollyman Park 10 1 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Kentwood Ave Tiptoe Ln City Limits (South) 10 0 5 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Tiptoe Ln Kentwood Ave Coloy Hills Ln 10 2 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Colony Hills Ln Heatherwood Dr Fallenleaf Ln 10 0 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Rose Blossom Dr McClellan Rd Huntridge Ln 10 22 4 20 10 74 88
85 97
75 117
82 86
104
111
102
81 61
58 58
56 55
61 37
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
37 of 2882
W/
Changes
Type/ Mode Description Location Cross St A Cross St B Safety Access Sustainability Balance Cost Final Rank New Rank Project Location Criteria Current
Score
Bicycle Neighborhood Route Huntridge Ln Rose Blossom Dr Stelling Rd 25 20 4 20 10 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Stern Ave Tilson Ave 10 21 3 0 10 54 103 132 Pedestrian A Intersection Sterling Ave Barnhart Ave 10 20 3 0 10 54 104 133 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Stelling Rd Homestead Rd 25 6 7 0 5 54 105 67 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Beardon Dr Fargo Dr Dunbar Dr 10 25 3 0 5 54 106 134 Pedestrian C Intersection De Anza Blvd I-280 30 1 2 0 10 54 107 70 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Bollinger Rd Clifden Way 30 4 4 0 5 54 108 71 Bicycle Separated Bikeway N Wolfe Rd Pruneridge Ave 300 ft. South of Perieter Rd 25 20 3 0 10
Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane N Wolfe Rd Homestead Rd Pruneridge Ave 25 0 5 0 5 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane N Wolfe Rd Stevens Creek Blvd 300 ft. South of Perimeter Rd 30 20 6 0 5
Pedestrian A Intersection Foothill Blvd Cristo Rey Dr 10 21 2 0 10 54 110 135 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Alves Dr Stelling Rd 680' East of Stelling Rd 20 8 10 0 5 54 111 72 Pedestrian A Intersection Randy Ln Merritt Dr 10 20 2 0 10 54 112 136 Pedestrian B Intersection Merritt Dr Vista Dr 10 20 2 0 10 54 113 137 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Stelling Rd Echo Hill Ct 30 2 1 0 10 54 114 74 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Wheaton Dr N Portal Ave Carol Lee Dr 20 1 3 20 10 53 115 81 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Barnhart Ave Wunderlich Dr 10 20 3 0 10 53 116 138 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Santa Teresa Dr Rae Ln Terrace Dr 0 20 1 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Terrace Dr Santa Teresa Dr Bubb Rd 10 0 0 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Linda Vista Dr Hyannisport Dr Santa Teresa Dr 10 20 1 20 10 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Lockwood Dr Stevens Creek Blvd 10 20 2 0 10 52 118 142 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Palm Ave S Foothill Blvd Scenic Blvd 15 23 1 0 2 52 119 143 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Kirwin Ln Lonna Ln De Anza Blvd 30 4 5 0 2 51 120 79 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Stevens Creek Blvd Foothill Blvd Permanente Rd 20 20 0 0 10 50 121 140 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Ann Arbor Ave Grenola Dr Hazelbrook Dr 10 25 1 0 5 50 122 145 Pedestrian A Intersection Bollinger Rd Blaney Ave 25 1 4 0 10 50 123 83 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Carmen Rd Janice Ave Scenic Blvd 10 24 1 0 5 50 124 146 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Forest Ave 260' East of Randy Ln 110' West of Toni Ct 10 22 3 0 5 50 125 148 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Stelling Rd Orion Ln 25 1 3 0 10 50 126 84 Pedestrian B Intersection Mary ave Lubec St 5 23 1 0 10 49 127 149 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Bollinger Rd Estates Dr 25 2 2 0 10 48 128 87 Pedestrian A Intersection Pacifica Dr Whitney Way 0 25 4 0 10 48 129 150 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stevens Creek Blvd Silver Oak Ln Camino Vista Dr 10 22 2 0 5 48 130 151 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Bollinger Rd Harland Dr Westlynn Way 30 0 3 10 5 48 131 93 Pedestrian A Intersection Lance Dr Bollinger Rd 25 1 2 0 10 48 132 89 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Kim St McClellan Rd Kirwin Ln 0 3 5 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Kim St Bollinger Rd De Foe Dr 5 1 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Westacres Dr McClellan Rd Shelly Dr 10 3 6 20 10 Shared Use Two Way Path Kim St Kirwin Ln Bollinger Rd 15 1 4 10 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route De Foe Dr Kim St Dumas Dr 10 20 4 20 10 Pedestrian A Intersection San Fernando Ave Orange Ave 0 24 4 0 10 48 134 153 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Foothill Blvd Cristo Rey Dr Vista Knoll Blvd 10 21 2 0 5 47 135 154 Technology Transportation
Technology Corridor Stelling Rd I-280 Rainbow Dr 12 26 5 0 0 47 136 N/A Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Stevens Creek Blvd 200' East of Lockwood Dr Prado Vista Dr 10 21 2 0 5 47 137 155
Pedestrian A, B Intersection Martinwood Way Bollinger Rd 20 4 4 0 10 47 138 90 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stelling Rd Echo Hill Ct 65' South of Echo Hill Ct 30 2 1 0 5 47 139 91
Bicycle Neighborhood Route Kirwin Ln Erin Way Kim St 10 0 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Erin Way Stelling Rd Kirwin Ln 25 1 4 20 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane S Stelling Rd Prospect Rd Orogrande Pl 25 0 2 10 10 47 141 94 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stelling Rd Squirehill Ct Rainbow Dr 30 1 1 0 5 46 142 92 Technology Transportation
Technology Corridor Wolfe Rd/Miller Ave Homestead Rd Calle de Barcelona 15 16 10 0 0 46 143 N/A Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stevens Creek Blvd Lockwood Dr 160' East of Lockwood Dr 10 20 2 0 5 46 144 158
Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stevens Creek Blvd Lebanon Dr 170' East of Lebanon Dr 10 20 2 0 5 46 145 159
Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Stevens Creek Blvd 170' East of Lebanon Dr Lockwood Dr 10 20 2 0 5 46 146 160 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd California Oak Way 5 20 2 0 10 46 147 161 Technology Transportation
Technology Corridor De Anza Blvd Homestead Rd Prospect Rd 16 5 20 0 0 45 148 N/A Pedestrian B Intersection Hyannisport Dr Fort Baker Dr 0 24 2 0 10 45 149 163 Pedestrian A Intersection 100' East of Scenic Ct Cir Pathway 0 25 1 0 10 44 150 165 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stelling Rd Catalano Ct Orion Ct 25 1 4 0 5 44 151 95 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Saich Way Alves Dr 10 8 7 0 10 44 152 126 119
52 48
121
109
133
96 140
117
112
54 47
38 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
38 of 2882
W/
Changes
Type/ Mode Description Location Cross St A Cross St B Safety Access Sustainability Balance Cost Final Rank New Rank Project Location Criteria Current
Score
Pedestrian A Intersection Scenic Blvd Palm Ave 0 24 1 0 10 43 153 167 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Foothill Blvd 170' South of Voss Ave Palm Ave 5 23 1 0 5 43 154 168 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Kingsbury Pl Scotland Dr Gardenside Ln 0 1 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Poppy Way Rainbow Dr Plum Blossom Dr 5 0 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Gardenside Ln Kingsbury Pl Rainbow Dr 5 0 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Jamestown Dr Plum Blossom Dr Prospect Rd 5 0 6 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Plum Blossom Dr Primrose Way Jamestown Dr 0 1 6 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Squirewood Way Scotland Dr Stelling Rd 25 0 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Scotland Dr Squirewood Way Kingsbury Pl 10 0 3 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Rainbow Dr Stelling Rd Bubb Rd 15 0 1 20 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Rainbow Dr Stelling Rd De Anza Blvd 15 0 4 10 10 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Alderbrook Ln Bollinger Rd 25 2 2 0 5 42 157 98 Pedestrian A Intersection Merriman Rd Voss Ave 0 22 1 0 10 42 158 169 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Orion Ln Stelling Rd Hunterston Pl 25 1 2 0 5 42 159 99 Pedestrian A Intersection Johnson Ave Tilson Ave 20 0 3 0 10 42 160 100 Pedestrian B Intersection Ainsworth Dr Bahl St 0 22 2 0 10 42 161 170 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Gardena Dr Stelling Rd Gardena Ct 20 5 7 0 2 41 162 101 Pedestrian A Intersection Ainsworth Dr Hartman Dr 0 21 2 0 10 41 163 171 Pedestrian A Intersection Lockwood Dr Voss Ave 0 21 1 0 10 41 164 172 Pedestrian A Intersection Santa Teresa Dr Columbus Ave 0 22 0 0 10 41 165 174 Pedestrian C Intersection Stelling Rd Rainbow Dr 20 1 1 0 10 40 166 139 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Bollinger Rd Farallone Dr 20 3 4 0 5 40 167 102 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Johnson Ave Wunderlich Dr 0 20 2 0 10 40 168 175 Technology Transportation
Technology Corridor Homestead Rd De Anza Blvd Tantau Ave 26 10 0 0 0 40 169 N/A Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Bollinger Rd De Anza Blvd Kim St 15 1 4 10 10 39 170 141 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Waterford Dr Stelling Rd Primrose Way 5 0 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Primrose Way Waterford Dr Plum Blossom Dr 0 1 6 20 10 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Foothill Blvd 170' South of Stevens Creek Blvd Rancho Ventura St 20 3 2 0 5 37 172 147
Pedestrian A Intersection Kirwin Ln Felton Way 10 4 5 0 10 36 173 152 Pedestrian A Intersection Imperial Ave Olive Ave 10 3 4 0 10 34 174 157 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Bubb Rd Regnart Rd 15 0 1 0 10 33 175 162 Pedestrian A Intersection Kirwin Ln Erin Way 10 1 4 0 10 32 176 164 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Foothill Blvd Santa Paula Ave 10 3 1 0 10 31 177 166 Bicycle Separated Bikeway Homestead Rd El Sereno Ave S Bernardo Ave 5 2 1 0 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Homestead Rd S Bernardo Ave Stelling Rd 25 5 4 0 5 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Homestead Rd Crist Dr El Sereno Ave 0 0 1 0 5 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Stevens Canyon Rd Riverside Dr 10 2 0 0 10 28 179 173 Pedestrian A Intersection Stelling Rd Waterford Dr 10 1 1 0 10 27 180 176 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Stelling Rd Seven Springs Pkwy 10 1 1 0 10 27 181 177 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane De Anza Blvd Rainbow Dr Rainbow Dr 10 0 6 0 10 26 182 178 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Kim St Bollinger Rd 5 1 3 0 10 25 183 179 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Foothill Blvd Walnut Cir 314' South of Rancho Ventura St 10 3 1 0 5 24 184 180
Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Foothill Blvd Santa Paula Ave Kinst Ct 10 3 1 0 5 24 185 181 Pedestrian A, C Intersection De Anza Blvd Prospect Rd 10 0 3 0 5 23 186 182 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) McClellan Rd 250' East of Stevens Canyon Rd
90' west of San
Leandro Ave 10 3 0 0 5 22 187 183
Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Orion Ln Derbyshire Dr Hunterston Pl 10 1 1 0 5 21 188 184 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Prospect Rd Stelling Rd 10 0 0 0 5 20 189 185 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Kim St Kirwin Ln 0 2 3 0 10 19 190 186 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Bubb Rd Rainbow Dr 5 0 0 0 10 19 191 187 Pedestrian A Intersection Dempster Ave Fitzgerald Ave 0 4 1 0 10 18 192 188 Pedestrian A Intersection Wildflower Way De Anza Blvd 0 1 3 0 10 18 193 189 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Alcalde Rd Merriman Rd Foothill Blvd 5 3 1 0 5 18 194 190 Pedestrian A Intersection Dempster Ave Stokes Ave 0 2 1 0 10 16 195 191 Pedestrian B, C Intersection Rainbow Dr Gardenside Ln 5 1 1 0 5 15 196 192 Pedestrian A Intersection Weymoth Dr Rainbow Dr 0 1 1 0 10 15 197 193 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) De Anza Blvd Rainbow Dr Wildflower Way 0 1 5 0 5 15 198 194 Pedestrian B, C Intersection Rainbow Dr De Anza Blvd 0 1 5 0 5 14 199 195 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Via Roncole Prospect Rd 0 0 3 0 5 11 200 196 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Alcalde Rd Avenida Ln Alicia Ct 0 1 1 0 5 10 201 197 Pedestrian A, C Intersection Canyon Oak Way Cristo Rey Dr 0 0 0 0 5 6 202 198 155
171 144
156 130
178 156
127
39 29
42 42
39 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
39 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 1
To: David Stillman, Transportation Manager, City of Cupertino Matthew Schroeder, Senior Transit and Transportation Planner, City of Cupertino From: Christopher Kidd and George Foster, Alta Planning + Design Date: January 1, 2026
Re: Cupertino ATP: Policy and Program Recommendations
This memo provides a summary of new legislation that may impact policy and program recommendations, as well as a consolidated, updated set of recommended policies and support programs to enhance the existing walking and rolling networks in the City of Cupertino. Several plans are referenced throughout this document, but the Active Transportation Plan will be referred to in capital letters as the Plan.

The memo first summarizes Recent Regional, State, and Federal Policies, then presents detailed tables of Policy and Program Recommendations. Although regional Equity informs all recommendations, these tables focus on the following key areas of potential policy and programmatic investment: Engineering, Encouragement, Education, Enforcement, and Evaluation. As an appendix, there is also an overview of relevant Existing Cupertino Policy Recommendations.

Recent Regional, State, and Federal Policies
The following State-level legislation has been passed in the last five years and will affect the implementation of this Active Transportation Plan and its accompanying policies and programs.

Roadway Safety Enhancements
Daylighting (AB 413): This law, which took effect in 2024, aims to improve visibility at crosswalks by prohibiting vehicles from stopping or parking within 20 feet of the vehicle approach side of any unmarked or marked crosswalk or 15 feet of crosswalks with curb extensions.

Speed Safety System Pilot Program (AB 645): This program, established by a bill signed in October 2023, permits select citiesto install speed camerasto deter reckless driving. Cities like San Francisco have already implemented the program, deploying cameras in high-risk areas. There is potential for Cupertino to implement speed cameras if this pilot is successful.

Reckless Driving Crackdown (SB 1509): This legislation aims to deter reckless driving, particularly speeding, by strengthening enforcement and considering the use of technology like speed cameras.

Safer, More Inclusive Street Design (SB 960): This bill enhances the California State Highway System by requiring Caltrans to incorporate features such as bike lanes, sidewalks, and transit facilities into its planning and projects.

Speed Limit Setting (AB 43): Legislation was passed to authorize Caltrans and local authoritiesto set, retain, or restore speed limits on highways, including the possibility of a reduction of five mph in some circumstances.
40 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
40 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 2
Infrastructure Funding and Regulation
Federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA): Though not state-specific legislation, California was expected to receive over $40 billion in federal funds from this bipartisan act, to be invested in various transportation projects, including roads, bridges, and other transportation infrastructure. However, many federally funded active transportation projects are currently facing political obstruction, and their future is unclear.

CEQA Exemptions for Bicycle and Mass-Transit Projects (SB 288): This bill added statutory California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exemptions for bicycle projects. SB 922 extended and enhanced the CEQA exemptions for sustainable transportation projects—including bike lanes, pedestrian infrastructure, bus rapid transit, and light rail—through 2030. This expedites the approval and construction of these climate-friendly projects by reducing administrative delays and costs, thereby promoting cleaner, safer, and more equitable transportation options statewide.
41 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
41 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 3
Policy and Program Recommendations
This section includes descriptions of existing and proposed policies and programs, organized by programmatic/policy category: Equity, Engineering, Encouragement, Education, Enforcement, and Evaluation. These policy and program recommendations align with the goals of the Active Transportation Plan: Safety, Accessibility, Maintenance, Sustainability, Multimodal Balance, and Fairness. Examples are provided for many to illustrate implementation.

Equity
The proposed programmatic and policy recommendations outlined in this memo should be prioritized through a regional equity lens to support efforts to improve the City’s active transportation network. This should be incorporated into all future policies and programs through early community involvement, targeted outreach, attending existing community events, hosting events in affected communities, and providing translation services.
42 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
42 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 4
Engineering
Pedestrian and bicycle support facilities provide increased comfort and convenience for individuals who use active modesto get around. Table 1 summarizes existing and proposed engineering policies and programs in the City that work in conjunction with existing infrastructure to improve the user experience. Infrastructure improvements should be prioritized near schools, parks, transit stops, medical centers, senior centers, City services, commercial areas, and HIN/HII.

Note: Several of the recommended policies and programs in this section are already in place in Cupertino but have significant potential for codification and expansion.

Table 1 Existing and Recommended Engineering Policies and Programs Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples
Existing
Vision Zero Policy The City adopted a local Vision Zero Action Plan to better understand local collisions and collaborate
across City Departments to improve safety for walking
and rolling in Cupertino.

Safety Cupertino Vision Zero
Action Plan
Complete Streets
Policy
The City adopted a local Complete Streets policy to
ensure streets are designed to enable safe,
convenient, and comfortable travel for users of all ages and abilities, regardless of their mode of
transportation.

Accessibility and
Multimodal
Balance
Cupertino Complete Streets
Policy
Online Information
and Service Requests
The City currently operates a telephone, app, and
online service request system (Cupertino311), which
allows residents to submit an issue or request for a
specific service for traffic signals, roadway issues, or sidewalk obstructions.

Accessibility and
Maintenance
Cupertino Maintenance
Services
Wayfinding Wayfinding signage providesimportant destination, distance, and navigation information to roadway
users. Specific wayfinding signs designed for people
walking and bicycling can be expanded and improved
at key locations across the City to further support
active transportation.

Accessibility Cupertino Wayfinding
Project
Recommended
Pedestrian-Scale
Lighting
Pedestrian-scale streetlights are designed at a lower
height and intensity to enhance visibility, safety, and comfort for people walking in urban or public
spaces. By increasing visibility, it improves safety and crime outcomes. It also enhances the walkability and
aesthetic appeal of public spaces, encouraging more
foot traffic and fostering a sense of community. LED
lights can be used to reduce energy costs, and
shields can be used to minimize night sky pollution
or limit light pollution on adjacent private property.

Safety
Alameda, CA
43 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
43 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 5
Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples
Crossing Facility
Improvements
City may improve crossing facilities by implementing
high-visibility crosswalks, advance stop or yield
markings, pedestrian refuge islands, and raised
crosswalks or intersections. These enhancements
would make people walking and rolling more visible
to drivers.

Safety Sacramento, CA
Evaluate Right
Turn on Red
Restrictions
Evaluate intersections to limit vehicles from turning
right at a red-light signal on a case-by-case basis, when traffic operations analysis indicates that the restriction can be implemented without creating unacceptable
vehicle delay.

Safety Ann Arbor, Michigan
Leading Pedestrian
Interval (LPI)
The City may consider LPIs at signalized
intersections, with a plan moving forward to update
key intersections.

Safety CA AB 2264 (2022)
Active Detection at
Intersections for
People Walking and
Rolling
Develop an inventory of signalized intersections
without active detection for people walking and
rolling and create a way forward for standardization
and inclusion at signal heads. Establish a
standardized approach for integrating reliable
detection technologies—such as passive infrared,
video, or radar sensors—ensuring they are
accurately placed along built and desired routes.

Define clear specificationsfor detector performance,
placement, and integration with signal systems, and
incorporate upgrades into signal maintenance,
capital projects, and retiming efforts. Include staff
training, contractor guidance, and periodic
evaluation to ensure effective and consistent
deployment citywide.

Safety and
Accessibility
Santa Clara County, CA
Active Detection White
Paper
Curb Extensions at
Intersections
Consider additional curb extensions at school-zone
intersections and mid-block crossings to reduce
vehicle speeds and improve overall transportation
safety.

Safety San Francisco, CA
Sidewalk and Curb
Cut Improvement
Program
The City may develop a sidewalk and curb cut
improvement program with a dedicated funding
stream to close sidewalk gaps and add curb ramps at
key locations. This program would allow the City to
be more responsive to local citizen complaints for
sidewalk and curb cut enhancements.

Safety, Fairness,
and
Maintenance
Palo Alto, CA
44 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
44 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 6
Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples
End-of-Trip Facilities End-of-trip facilities such as bike parking, water stations, kiosks, and fix-it stations help encourage
people to bike more by providing the amenities they
need at the end of their trip. These facilities are
typically most suitable in City right-of-way areas
with high concentrations of walking and rolling, such
as the Cupertino Library.

Accessibility and
Sustainability
Los Angeles, CA
Lower Speed Limits Create a program to analyze and reduce speeds where appropriate along arterial and collector
roadways based on the CA Manual for Setting Speed
Limits. Lowering the speed limits on streets may
lessen the severity and frequency of crashes.

Safety Santa Monica, CA
Lower School Zone
Speed Limits
Per California Vehicle Code Section 22358.8, the City
may consider reducing speed limits around School
Zones, which may be lowered to 15 mph on all twoway residential streets within 500 feet of schools, and 25 mph up to 1,000 feet from schools.

Safety and
Accessibility
Oakland, CA
Quick Build Project
Implementation
Quick Build projects typically include less expensive
materials such as paint, thermoplastic, and
bollards/delineators (or other sturdy but removable
materials). These improvements share many of the
same safety benefits as their permanent
counterparts, but can be implemented more quickly
and cost-effectively, allowing the City to be
responsive to safety concerns while still planning for
long-term funding and implementation. The City
should consider implementing Quick Build projects
identified in completed school walk audits, in
addition to other priority areas.

Safety and
Maintenance
CalBike Design Guide
Quick Build White Paper
Expand the City Tree
Canopy
Consider planting shade trees and other greening
elements along corridors where people may be
walking and rolling, and within school zones.

Caltrans considers street trees to be traffic-calming
elements as they are often attributed to a perceived
narrowing of the roadway, a sense of rhythm and
human scale created by framing the street, and the
perception that the driver is in a place where they
are more likely to encounter people walking or
rolling and cross-traffic.

Sustainability
and Fairness
San José, CA
45 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
45 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 7
Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples
Update Street Design
Standards
Review and update all relevant policy and design
standards regarding bikeway facilities, path and
sidewalk design, materials, and supporting amenities
to be consistent with the most recent best practices
and state and federal standards for bicycle and
pedestrian facilities and in compliance with the latest ADA Standards for Accessible Design and Public
Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG).

Accessibility,
Maintenance,
and Multimodal
Balance
Sacramento, CA
Maintenance
Program
Maintenance is deeply tied to the usability and
lifespan of these engineering recommendations.

Cupertino can develop more detailed protocols for
regular street sweeping and debris removal on
bikeways—particularly Class IV protected lanes and
Class I multi-use paths—to maintain comfort and
reduce risks. Expanded, detailed vegetation
management can address overgrowth that obstructs
visibility at intersections, encroaches onto sidewalks
and paths, and blocks signage. The 311 reporting
system for issues like potholes, flooding, or
obstructions should be widely promoted and
integrated into existing municipal apps and customer
service portals. Maintenance guidelines should
specifically account for newer infrastructure types,
such as roundabouts, green paint treatments, and
modular curbs or delineators, to ensure that
materials are durable and repairable. Coordination
between construction, maintenance, and repaving
schedules is a proven strategy to reduce disruptions
and extend pavement life, and Cupertino can adopt a
“dig-once” approach to align upgrades with
resurfacing or utility work. Regular inspections,
performance audits, and a publicly accessible
maintenance log can help ensure transparency,
accountability, and timely repairs.

Accessibility and
Maintenance
Sacramento, CA
46 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
46 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 8
Encouragement
Encouragement programs help to create a lasting active transportation culture and can encourage overall mode share shifts. Table 2 provides an overview of existing and recommended walking and rolling encouragement programs.

Table 2 Existing and Recommended Encouragement Programs Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples
Existing
Safe Routesto
School (SR2S)
The City should continue the existing Safe Routes to
School Program and place greater emphasis on
working with school districts to address on-site
circulation and spillover traffic.

Safety,
Accessibility, and
Fairness
Cupertino SR2S Program
Bike to Work/
Wherever Days
The City can continue to sponsor Bike to Work/
Wherever Day eventsin support of regional efforts.

Accessibility Silicon Valley Bicycle
Coalition BTWD
Adopt-a-Trail
Program
The existing Santa Clara County program provides
individuals, groups, businesses, and clubs the
opportunity to adopt a section of trail on an annual
basis. Each sponsor supportstheir Adopted Trail with
financial contributions and volunteer trail work.

Maintenance Santa Clara County
Adopt-a-Trail
Recommended
Open Streets Open Street events promote and celebrate bicycling and walking and encourage participation from
neighborhoods.

Accessibility and
Sustainability
CicLAvia
Social Walks/Rides Support City departments and local organizations in hosting social rides or walks, like Bike for Boba.

Accessibility and
Sustainability
San José, CA
Walking School
Buses and Bike
Trains [SR2S]
Walking School Buses and Bike Trains are organized
groups ofstudents walking/biking to school under the
supervision of a guardian, teacher, or adult volunteer.

These groups follow predetermined routes and can
operate on an occasional or daily basis, depending on
the interest from families.

Accessibility and
Fairness
Alameda County, CA
Portland, OR
47 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
47 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 9
Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples
Bike Parking
Inventory
Map existing racks in the City and upload them to the
open data portal. Develop and publish a public-facing
guide that outlines various types of secure
micromobility parking infrastructure, such as bike
corrals, covered racks, and lockers (like Oonee Pods).

The guide should explain the ideal use cases for each
option, based on factors such as location (e.g., transit hubs, business districts), user needs (e.g., long-term
vs. short-term parking), and security levels. Including photos, technical specifications, and maintenance
considerations will help the City, businesses, and
community organizations make informed decisions
about selecting and installing the right facilities.

Accessibility,
Maintenance,
and Fairness
APBP Essentials of Bike
Parking
Bike Rack
Program
Consider establishing a Bike Rack Installation Program
to provide secure, convenient bicycle parking that
supports everyday bicycling and reduces parking
barriers.

Accessibility
Petaluma, CA
Bicycle Parking
at Large Events
Revise Cupertino Municipal Code regarding event
permits to include “Conditions for Issuance” to
require events expected to draw more than 5,000
attendees must provide secure, attended bicycle
parking for attendees at no charge.

Accessibility Oakland, CA
Electric
Micromobility
Expansion
Cupertino has an opportunity to lead in sustainable
transportation by developing a forward-thinking
policy that actively encourages the use of electric
micromobility devices—such as personal e-bikes, escooters, and other small electric vehicles—in line with state and regional standards. These devices
make active transportation more accessible by
extending travel distances, reducing trip times, and
performing well in various weather conditions. This
policy can define appropriate use on bike lanes,
multi-use trails, and low-speed streets, with safe
speed limits that prioritize both comfort and safety.

The City can encourage electric micromobility use
and discourage illegal devices and modifications
through public education, safe riding guidance, and
improved infrastructure, such assecure parking with
charging options.

Accessibility and
Fairness
Palo Alto, CA
Santa Cruz, CA
48 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
48 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 10
Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples
Trail Steward
Volunteers
Engage with volunteer organizations to regularly
maintain and address community safety concerns
around vegetation and debris on shared-use paths.

Events can be opportunities for volunteers to help
their community.

Maintenance Richmond, CA
Rails-to-Trails Maintenance
Transportation
Demand
Management
(TDM)
Implementation
Plan
Develop a Transportation Demand Management
Implementation Plan or Report to increase support
for commuters bicycling or walking to work. This may
include identifying additional metrics for businesses
to count active transportation-supportive policies
towards their own TDM plans and goals.

Sustainability
and Multimodal
Balance
Metropolitan Transportation
Commission
Walk and Roll
Ambassadors
Walk and Roll Ambassadors are trained community
volunteers who promote safe walking and rolling,
especially among students and families. They
engage in outreach, education, and encouragement
activities to foster active transportation and build a
culture of mobility and safety. These roles are
particularly important in communities where English
is not the first language.

Safety and
Accessibility
Bike East Bay
Partner with
Bicycle
Organizations
The formation of strong relationships with local
bicycle advocates and bicycle clubs will encourage
mutually beneficial collaboration and help the City
reach its plan goals. The City is encouraged to
partner with organizations in the area.

Accessibility CalBike List of Local Partners
Partner and
Coordinate
with County
Agencies
Coordinate with representativesfrom various County
agencies, including County Public Health and VTA, for
project and program implementation.

Accessibility and
Maintenance
Santa Clara County, CA
Bicycle Friendly
Business
Program
Similar to the Bicycle Friendly Community
designation, the Bicycle Friendly Business program
recognizes businessesfor their effortsto encourage a
more bicycle-friendly atmosphere. This requires
businesses to implement various strategies to cater
to the diverse needs of customers and employees.

The City of Cupertino Civic Center Plaza has Gold
award status.

Accessibility and
Sustainability
League of American
Bicyclists
49 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
49 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 11
Education
Walking and rolling education programs help individuals interested in active transportation feel more comfortable, safe, and confident navigating streets and shared-use paths. Table 3 outlines existing educational programs in the City as well as potential program expansion.

Table 3 Existing and Recommended Education Programs
Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples
Existing
Safe Routesto
School (SR2S)
The existing SR2S Program provides education and
resources for schoolsite administrators, parents, and
children on bicycle safety, pedestrian awareness, and
traffic concerns.

Safety,
Accessibility, and
Fairness
Cupertino SR2S
Walking and
Rolling Safety
Campaign
Create a City-sponsored outreach campaign to
encourage all road users to abide by local laws and be
courteous to other users. This campaign may be
targeted at a single user type (e.g., cyclists) or at
multiple users. Local stakeholders may assist in
developing goals that are rooted in community
concerns and issues. Campaigns should be deployed
at regular intervals throughout the year to promote
an attitude of safety awareness. Safety campaigns
should be prioritized near schools, parks, transit
stops, commercial areas, and at high collision
corridors.

Safety and
Accessibility
Cupertino Vision Zero PSA
Campaign
Bicycle Rodeos
[SR2S]
The City of Cupertino SR2S Program offers bicycle
rodeo programming at Cupertino Unified schools,
providing a blacktop training course on bicycle safety.

Safety Cupertino SR2S
Recommended
“New
Infrastructure”
Education
Campaign
Often, when infrastructure changes occur, there is a
missing education component to the community
about how to interact with the new design or feature.

Education materials and messaging can be developed
during the installation of infrastructure, which the
general public may be unfamiliar with, such as unique
interchanges/roundabouts, two-stage turn boxes, or
advisory shoulders.

Safety and
Multimodal
Balance
UC Davis
50 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
50 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 12
Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples
Driver Education
Program
Establish a citywide driver education program that
focuses on improving awareness and promoting safe
interactions with people walking, biking, and rolling,
incorporating best practicesfrom Vision Zero and Safe
Systems approaches. The program could include
modules on recognizing vulnerable road users,
crosswalk laws, yielding at intersections, safely passing cyclists, and navigating areas with high activity or
limited visibility. The curriculum can be conducted in
partnership with local school districts and SR2S
coordinators. For older adults or existing drivers,
collaborate with the DMV and community centers to
offer targeted refresher workshops. The City can
promote the program through strategic outreach
campaigns—such as during Bike to Everywhere Month
in May—using social media, public service
announcements, and partnerships with local
employers, transit agencies, and neighborhood
associations. Additional outreach tools could include
short educational videos,
translated materials, and interactive online modules.

Safety League of American
Bicyclists
Bicycle Safety
Education for
Adults
Partner with local organizations to provide classes for adults to learn bicycle safety. Support growth by
advertising and providing meeting space in Cupertino.

Safety and
Accessibility
Sonoma County, CA
Huntington Beach, CA
Electric
Micromobility
Education
With the proliferation of e-bikes and other electric
micromobility devices, people may not understand or
be misinformed about how to use these modes safely
and legally. An education campaign can be targeted at
e-mobility, especially among students who may be
excited about the increased travel opportunities
offered by such devices.

Safety and
Accessibility
California Highway Patrol
51 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
51 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 13
Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples
Waste Bin
Placement
Provide clear instructions on the City website and in
utility bills about the proper placement of waste bins.

Where on-street parking exists, bins should be placed
near the curb, within the parking aisle. Residents
should be instructed to place bins against the curb
where no on-street parking exists to minimize
intrusion into the bicycle lane. Collaborate with waste management companiesto add reflective markingsto
waste bins to increase their visibility at night and
reduce the risk of bicycle collisions with misplaced
bins. The City could also work with management
companies to stencil “Do Not Place In Bicycle Lane”
on the waste bins to remind residents of proper
placement.

Maintenance
and Multimodal
Balance
Pomona, CA
Mini Main Street
Education Events
[SR2S]
Host Mini Main Street safety education events and
install permanent traffic gardens at select schools. Mini Main Streets and traffic gardens provide safe
environmentsfor children to practice roadway safety.

Safety Mountain View, CA
52 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
52 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 14
Enforcement
Enforcement programs help to institutionalize safe walking and rolling transportation systems. By prioritizing relationships between law enforcement and individuals who walk and roll, these programs help create a safe environment for all users. Table 4 below lists the proposed enforcement programs for the City.

Table 4 Recommended Enforcement Programs
Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples
Recommended
Traffic Ticket
Reduction
Help develop a partnership program with the Santa
Clara County Sheriff and a bicycle education provider
to offer bicycle education as a traffic court option.

People who receive a citation/infraction on a bicycle
for California Vehicle Code violations would be
permitted to attend a Basic Street Skills
class to reduce or waive fines.

Safety and Fairness Marin County, CA
Bike Patrol
Program
Partner with the County Sheriff to develop a program
that provides routine patrolling on bicycles. The
program would enable increased community
engagement and promote bicycle safety.

Safety and Fairness El Cerrito, CA
Targeted
Enforcement
Target enforcement of vehicular violations at
locations with a high incidence of red-light running
and HIN/HII.

Safety and Fairness San José, CA
53 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
53 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 15
Evaluation
Programs to help evaluate and track progress toward reaching the Plan’s goals are essential for long-term success and effective project implementation. Table 5 lists proposed programs that help identify what’s working, what’s not working, and where additional efforts are needed following the completion of the plan.

Table 5 Recommended Evaluation Programs
Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples
Existing
Active
Transportation
Online Portal
Update and maintain the GIS portal to display recent
and ongoing active transportation project planning
and status, as well as annual statistics on pedestrian
and bicycle-involved collisions. This portal may also
include links to other active transportation
resourcesthroughout the City.

Safety and
Accessibility
Cupertino Open Data
Portal
Recommended
School Walk Audit
Reports [SR2S]
Update reports with new safety assessments at each
school to identify specific barriers and challenges
faced by students who walk or roll to school and
develop countermeasures to address the identified
deficiencies.

Safety Cupertino SR2S
Annual Walking
and Rolling
Collision Reports
Annual reviews of collisions involving vulnerable
roadway users with the County Sheriff will help the
City assess traffic safety issues and track progress
towards a safer community for people walking and
rolling.

Safety San Francisco, CA
Walking and
Rolling Count
Program
(Manual and
Automated)
Conducting regular walking and rolling counts can
help the City understand how travel behavior is
changing over time. This would include manual and
automated data collection. Manual counts are useful
for capturing nuanced data (age, gender, helmet use,
group sizes) and validating automated counters. This
can be done in collaboration with universities,
advocacy groups, or volunteers to expand manual
count capacity. Automated counters (infrared,
pneumatic tubes, LiDAR, video AI) provide long-term,
high-frequency data and reduce staff time. The use of
automated counting technology, such as in-ground
sensors, infrared counters, or video analytics, can be
integrated into ongoing signal maintenance and street
Maintenance
and Multimodal
Balance
Oakland, CA
NCHRP Report 797
54 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
54 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 16
Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples
improvement projects to minimize installation costs.
1 When combined with models that predict where
walking and bicycling would be expected, count data
can also identify locations where people are expected
to travel by these modes but do not, often due to a
lack of infrastructure. Coordinate with regional
planning and transit agencies and adjacent
municipalities to ensure consistency in methodologies
(e.g., same time periods, equipment calibration, and
data formats) and include metadata on count
conditions (e.g., weather, construction, events) for
context.

Walking and
Rolling Count
Program
(Aggregated
Data)
To complement physical counters and enhance
citywide data coverage, the City could purchase or
subscribe to aggregate mobility datasets from
companies like StreetLight Data and Replica, which
provide insights derived from anonymized GPS,
cellular, and location-based services data. These
datasets can provide a broader understanding of
walking and biking patterns, helping to identify
underserved neighborhoods or emerging trends in
travel behavior. Conduct regular validation of
aggregated data against manually collected data.

Safety,
Maintenance,
and Multimodal
Balance
San Francisco, CA
1 For example, the GridSmart SMARTMOUNT Bell Camera may be configured on existing poles at intersections to count people walking and rolling as they cross, with subscription to an additional software module. 55 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
55 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 17
Appendix: Existing Cupertino Policy Recommendations
General Plan Mobility Element
The City of Cupertino General Plan Mobility Element, adopted in 2015 and updated in 2024, outlines goals, policies, and strategies for transportation network improvements necessary to accommodate Cupertino's anticipated growth. The Element aims to make alternative modes of transportation attractive choices, helping to reduce strain on the automobile network and improve the health and quality of life for residents and businesses.

Regional Coordination
• Regional Transportation Planning: Participate in regional transportation planning processesto develop programs consistent with the goals and policies of Cupertino’s General Plan and to minimize adverse impacts on the City’s circulation system. Work with neighboring cities to address regional transportation and land use issues of mutual interest.
• Citywide VMT Reduction: Framework for reducing VMT citywide includes limiting parking supply and implementing a citywide bikeshare program.
• Regional Trail Development: Continue to plan and provide for a comprehensive system of trails and pathways consistent with regional systems, including the Bay Trail, Stevens Creek Corridor, and Ridge Trail.

Complete Streets
• Street Design: Adopt and maintain street design standards to optimize mobility for all transportation modes, including automobiles, walking, bicycling, and transit. • Adjacent Land Use: Design roadway alignments, lane widths, medians, parking and bicycle lanes, crosswalks, and sidewalks to complement adjacent land uses in keeping with the vision of the Planning Area. Strive to minimize adverse impacts and expand alternative transportation options for all Planning Areas (Special Areas and Neighborhoods). Improvement standards shall also consider the urban, suburban, and rural environments found within the City. • Connectivity: Promote pedestrian and bicycle improvements that improve connectivity between planning areas, neighborhoods and services, and foster a sense of community. • Community Impacts: Reduce traffic impacts and support alternative modes of transportation rather than constructing barriers to mobility. Do not close streets unless there is a demonstrated safety or overwhelming through-traffic problem and there are no acceptable alternatives, since street closures move the problem from one street to another.
• Traffic Calming: Consider the implementation of best practices on streets to reduce speeds and make them user-friendly for alternative modes of transportation, including pedestrians and bicyclists.

Walkability and Bikeability
• Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan: Adopt and maintain a Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan that outlines policies and improvements to streets, the extension of trails, and pathways to create a safe way for people of all ages to bike and walk on a daily basis. • Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossings: Enhance pedestrian and bicycle crossings and pathways at key • locations across physical barriers such as creeks, highways, and road barriers. • Development: Require new development and redevelopment to increase connectivity through direct and safe pedestrian connections to public amenities, neighborhoods, and shopping and employment destinations throughout the city.
• Street Widths: Preserve and enhance citywide pedestrian and bike connectivity by limiting street widening purely for automobiles as a means of improving traffic flow. • Curb Cuts: Minimize the number and width of driveway openings. 56 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
56 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 18
• Capital Improvement Program: Plan for improvements to pedestrian and bicycle facilities and eliminate gaps along the pedestrian and bicycle network as part of the City’s Capital Improvement Program. • Bicycle Parking: Require new development and redevelopment to provide public and private bicycle parking.
• Outreach: Actively engage the community in promoting walking and bicycling through education, encouragement, and outreach on improvement projects and programs. • Spaces for Pedestrians: Require parking lots to include clearly defined paths for pedestrians, providing a safe route to building entrances.
• Proactive Enforcement: Prioritize enforcement of traffic speeds and regulations on all streets with bike lanes, bike routes, and around schools.

Transit
• Access to Transit Services: Support right-of-way design and amenities consistent with local transit goals to improve transit as a viable alternative to driving.
• Transit Facilities with new development: Work with VTA and/or major developments to ensure all new development projects include amenities to support public transit, including bus stop shelters, space for transit vehicles as appropriate, and attractive amenities such as trash receptacles, signage, seating, and lighting.
• Vallco Shopping District Transfer Station: Work with VTA and/or other transportation service organizations to study and develop a transit transfer station that incorporates a hub for alternative transportation services such as car sharing, bike sharing, and/ or other services.

Safe Routes to School
• Safe Routes to School: Promote Safe Routes to Schools programs for all schools serving the city. • Prioritize Projects: Ensure that bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements include projects to enhance safe accessibility to schools.
• Connections to Trails: Connect schools to the citywide trailsystem. • Education: Support education programs that promote safe walking and bicycling to schools.

Transportation Impact Analysis
• Protected Intersections: Consider adopting a Protected Intersection Policy, which would identify intersections where improvements would not be considered, which would degrade levels of service for non-vehicular modes of transportation. Potential locations include intersections in Priority Development Areas (PDAs) and other areas where non-vehicular transportation is a key consideration, such as near shopping districts, schools, parks, and senior citizen developments.

Roadway System Efficiency
• Street Width: Except as required by environmental review for new developments, limit widening of streets as a means of improving traffic efficiency and focus instead on operational improvements to preserve community character.

Transportation Infrastructure
• Transportation Improvement Plan: Develop and implement an updated citywide transportation improvement plan necessary to accommodate vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation improvements to meet the City’s needs.
• Multimodal Improvements: Integrate the financing, design, and construction of pedestrian and bicycle facilities with street projects. Build pedestrian and bicycle improvements at the same time as improvements for vehicular circulation to enable travelers to transition from one mode of transportation to another (e.g., bicycle to bus).
57 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
57 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 19
Bicycle Transportation Plan
The 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan provided a vision and specific steps to create safer and more comfortable conditions for people to bike in Cupertino. The Plan included the following relevant recommended policies:
• Policy 1.A.1: Support and expand the City of Cupertino Safe Routes to School program. • Policy 1.A.2: Partner with the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition to offer routine adult and family bicycle education classes in Cupertino.
• Policy 1.B.1: Incorporate messaging in all City media that promotes the benefits of active lifestyles and raises awareness of walking and bicycling facilities in the community. • Policy 1.C.1: Partner with tourism and economic development agencies to promote Cupertino as a destination for active recreation and active lifestyles. • Policy 1.C.2: Create a Bicycle Friendly Business program to recognize and promote bicycle-friendly businesses in Cupertino.
• Policy 1.C.3: Collaborate with county and regional partners to create bikeway connections to the local tourism generators and to promote active recreation in the region. • Policy 1.D.1: Work with Santa Clara County Sherriff’s Office to review collision locations and ‘close call’ reports and identify locationsfor increased enforcement of motorist and bicyclist behavior. • Policy 1.E.1: Review the Bicycle Transportation Plan performance measures at regular intervals to review progress and update priorities as necessary.
• Policy 1.E.2: Conduct bicycle counts citywide at regular intervals to better understand the profile of residents bicycling in Cupertino as well as measure the impacts of newly implemented infrastructure and programs.
• Policy 2.A.1: Annually review the number, locations, and contributing factors of bicycle-related collisions to identify and implement ongoing improvements at collision locations throughout the transportation network.
• Policy 2.A.2: Identify opportunities to reduce bicyclist exposure by reducing locations or lengths of conflict areas with vehicles or by providing dedicated and separated facilities where feasible. • Policy 2.A.3: Adopt a Vision Zero policy to eliminate traffic fatalities by 2026. • Policy 2.A.4: Study the need for 15 mph School Zone speed limits and adopt in appropriate locations by 2020.
• Policy 2.A.5: Develop a City policy for the regular documentation of bike facility quality and maintenance of bicycle facilities throughout the City.
• Policy 3.A.1: Implement the recommendations from this Bicycle Transportation Plan Update. • Policy 3.A.2: Integrate bicycle facilities as part of the design and construction of upgrades or resurfacing of all existing roadways.
• Policy 3.B.1: Create a low-stress network in parallel to the arterial bikeway network, providing an alternative that is appealing to residents of all ages and abilities. • Policy 3.B.2: Upgrade and improve the existing arterial bikeway network to increase bicyclist comfort and lower barriers for more risk-averse users.
• Policy 3.B.3: Develop a citywide wayfinding system, providing access to appropriate locations such as employment centers, schools, and commercial centers.
• Policy 3.B.4: Prioritize the installation of bicycle parking in the public right-of-way at key commercial and retail destinations.

Pedestrian Transportation Plan
The ensuing 2018 Pedestrian Transportation Plan provides a vision and specific stepsfor creating an inviting, safe, and connected pedestrian network. The plan establishes a framework for developing and maintaining pedestrian facilities and recommends policies, programs, and messaging to promote walking. That includes the following relevant recommended policies:

Infrastructure and Operations
58 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
58 of 2882
Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 20
• Develop/adopt a Complete Streets Design Manual
• Design standard speeds in pedestrian areas do not require a routine need for traffic calming • Adopt a Complete Streets internal checklist
• Formalize traffic calming practices
• Reconsider speed limit criteria
• 15 mph zones near schools, parks, community facilities, orsenior housing • Establish an accessible design checklist
Evaluation and Planning
• Include pedestrian and bicycle counts as a routine element of motor vehicle counts • Conduct pedestrian and bicycle counts for the planning/evaluation of the City's trailsystem Education and Enforcement
• Continue promoting walking and biking through the SR2S program • Develop/implement targeted safety campaignsfor other groups (adults,seniors, drivers) Project Implementation
• Secure funding for broader education efforts
• Continue to collaborate with related and adjacent agencies • Explore opportunities for improving coordination with major employers • Develop a line item in the CIP for implementation of the PTP Vision Zero Action Plan
Finally, the 2024 Vision Zero Action Plan focused on broad strategies and actions aimed at eliminating severe injuries and fatalities on the City’s transportation network. Of particular note, it identified a High Injury Network (HIN) and a set of High Injury Intersections (HII) based on collision history. This set of HIN and HII areas should be priorities for targeted investment of many of the recommendations in this memo. Robust community engagement on this plan resulted in the following relevant recommended policies:
• A.1 - Establish a Vision Zero Task Force
• A.2 - Identify sustainable funding sources for a Vision Zero program • A.6 - Integrate Vision Zero safety principles into forthcoming City plans and design documents • A.8 - Continue monitoring existing speed limits on City streets in accordance with the changes made by AB 43 to further lower speeds
• A.12 - Set up periodic pedestrian and cyclist counts at standardized locations • B.2 - Create a carefully ranked roster of extra safety projects • B.3 - Install quick, light, and adaptable projects proven to achieve real, tangible benefits (Quick-Build projects)
• B.6 - Update signal timing plans to enhance safety for all modes of transportation, which may include adjustments to all-red intervals and pedestrian crossing times. • B.8 - Create an internal procedure for evaluating and implementing Vision Zero countermeasures on projects located within the HIN
• B.9 - When identifying safety enhancements, ensure countermeasures align with the City's Complete Streets policy
• D.1 - Implement the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan
• D.2 - Prioritize pedestrian crossing improvements on the High Injury Network • D.3 - Complete projects that enhance bicycle and pedestrian safety at intersections with turning vehicles • D.4 - Develop and maintain an Active Transportation Plan • D.5 - Install high-visibility crosswalks in proximity to schools. • D.6 - Develop a comprehensive Safe Routes to Schools Plan 59 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
59 of 2882
Active Transportation Plan Impact Evaluation Guidelines Following the Council-approved initiation of any new Active Transportation Plan (ATP) project, and when parking or traffic impacts are identified during the preliminary engineering phase (30% design), staff will return to the City Council to present the final 30% design, identified impacts, and potential trade-offs. At that meeting, the Council will determine whether the project should undergo a detailed impact analysis tailored to its specific impacts. This level of analysis requires a degree of design detail that is available only once the 30% design phase has been completed.

The detailed impact analysis described in these guidelines is intentionally scheduled for this phase of a project because at this phase, the City is advancing a concept from the ATP into preliminary design. It does not approve final plans or commit to construction.

The purpose of this early design effort is to translate a plan-level concept into a specific layout that defines lane configurations, parking, intersection control, and other geometric and operational details.

A 30% level of design is necessary to evaluate traffic and parking impacts with technical accuracy because traffic analysis tools, such as Synchro, TransCAD, Cube, or Inrixbased models, require defined lane assignments, turn pockets, signal phasing, parking layouts, and other project features not known prior to 30% design in order to produce meaningful estimates of delay, queues, diversion patterns, and parking utilization.

By conducting a detailed analysis at the 30% phase, the City balances accuracy with flexibility. A complete set of 30% design plans is sufficient for accurate modeling and is early enough in the design process to allow the Council to call for modifications or discontinue the project if the identified impacts are unacceptable. In addition, tying the analysis to the identification of parking or traffic impacts at 30% ensures that funding is focused on projects where the preliminary design reveals meaningful operational or parking impacts, rather than expending significant resources on every concept in the ATP, regardless of its risk profile.

Accordingly, if the Council requests an impact analysis following the 30% phase, then additional budget must be approved for the project’s Engineering Services Consultant to manage data collection and to evaluate the 30% design within the context of the City’s transportation network through traffic or parking analysis. 60 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
60 of 2882
The tasks below summarize the scope of what could potentially be required for project impact analysis. Following the completion of 30% design for impacted projects, the Consultant will prepare a cost estimate for transportation analysis, which will also be presented to the Council for consideration when the Council reviews the 30% plans.

If Council supports this approach, staff will incorporate this impact evaluation framework into the final Active Transportation Plan as an internal policy that then applies to new ATP projects.

The tasks below may not apply to all projects, but it is assumed that impact analysis would roughly equate to 10% of project construction costs.

Task 1. Data Collection and Analysis Memorandum
Cost: $5,000 - $10,000
Prepare a memorandum describing the proposed approach to data collection and analysis. The memo will list all relevant data to be collected based on the project’s determined impacts and document sources, formats, and methods. This could include signal phasing, vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle counts, an inventory of existing traffic control devices, or an inventory of parking supply. It will specify which transportation network or traffic operation elements, such as intersection delay, roadway segment operations, or parking, each dataset will support. The draft memorandum will be submitted to City staff for review before initiating data collection.

Task 2. Initial Data Collection
Cost: $15,000 - $30,000
• Obtain commercially available origin–destination data, through providers such as StreetLight, Inrix, or Replica for the project area, including both peak periods.

Collect turning-movement counts at project area intersections for both peak periods, including vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle volumes, right-turn-on-red movements, and initial queues at signalized intersections.
• Conduct a field visit of the project site and broader study area to verify existing and planned facilities identified in the data collection tasks, confirm any facilities constructed since prior programming documents, and investigate unusual trends in traffic patterns.
61 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
61 of 2882
Task 3. Traffic Operations Analysis
Cost: $20,000 - $40,000
• Document existing conditions based on collected counts and field observations.

Results will be summarized in narrative text, Level of Service (LOS) tables, figures visualizing lane configurations, traffic controls, and volumes, and supporting calculation outputs. If appropriate for evaluating the impacts of interest, speeds along the project area will be estimated and validated based on the City’s latest Engineering Traffic Survey, and queue lengths in dedicated turn lanes and through lanes between intersections under gridlock conditions will be evaluated. • Develop and refine Synchro traffic models to represent Existing and Existing-PlusProject conditions. The models will be used to identify any adverse or significant impacts associated with the proposed project improvements. • Assess proposed intersection and corridor layouts for accessibility, including lane widths and turning radii, and identify opportunities for new or modified traffic control devices to support operations and safety.
• Develop recommendations to address identified potential operational impacts.

Task 4: Parking Impact Analysis (If needed)
Cost: $5,000 - $15,000
• Prior to conducting a parking survey, develop a geodatabase of on-street parking supply along the project area. The database will count, by block face, the number of spaces, as well as all applicable parking regulations, such as permits. The initial inventory will rely on the City’s GIS database, aerial imagery, and street-level photography, then verified in the field, and summarized in an exhibit that depicts curb conditions and the total existing parking supply.
• Perform parking occupancy counts at 30-minute intervals by block face during typical weekday midday (noon–2:00 p.m.) and evening (8:00–10:00 p.m.) periods, and on a Saturday to represent weekend conditions.
• Compare parking supply changes associated with the project design to observed parking demand to quantify the number of on-street spaces affected. The analysis will include spaces in front of nearby properties within a 500-foot buffer of the 62 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
62 of 2882
affected spaces to determine potential redistribution and broader neighborhood impacts.

Task 5: Impact Report
Cost: $5,000 - $10,000
The combined work will result in a set of findings and recommendations on specific traffic operations and parking impacts resulting from the project. The report will be used to inform potential further project development and frame public communications. The report will be evaluated by the City Council to assess the extent of the impacts and consider whether the project’s preliminary design should be modified to minimize the learned impacts or discontinued entirely. 63 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
63 of 2882
Project Effectiveness Guidelines
This memo describes the process for using data to measure the success of new projects recommended in the Active Transportation Plan (ATP), specifically for Class II, Class IIB, and Class IV bicycle facilities. The goal of this approach is to ensure that transportation projects developed by the ATP and completed through the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) successfully advance the City’s goals and priorities.

The ATP supports two City policy priorities. These are traffic safety (Vision Zero Action Plan) and reducing greenhouse gas emissions (Climate Action Plan). The City’s Vision Zero Action Plan calls for eliminating serious and fatal collisions by 2040, and the Climate Action Plan seeks to reduce vehicle trips and their associated emissions in part by shifting short driving trips to walking, biking, and transit.

To demonstrate progress toward these goals, staff must track the number of people using new facilities and the safety of those facilities. This proposed data-driven evaluation approach will allow the City to answer basic but important questions, such as whether these projects encourage the use of active transportation modes, whether collision rates are decreasing even as ridership increases, and, potentially, which types of improvements deliver the greatest benefits.

The City does not currently own the counting technology needed to answer these questions on a citywide scale. Historically, staff has relied on occasional spot counts or project-specific traffic studies, which provide only short snapshots of bicycle and pedestrian volumes. To fully measure the effect of new ATP projects, staff proposes establishing an approach that combines a one-time citywide baseline count effort along with project-specific before-and-after counts for key bikeway projects. This will require the purchase or lease of bike-ped counting equipment and, potentially, the associated analytics software, so bicycle and pedestrian activity can be measured in a repeatable way.

Staff recommends that the first action of the ATP should be to conduct a comprehensive baseline bicycle and pedestrian count at all ATP project locations across the City. This initial effort would record how many people are currently biking (and walking, where feasible). The equipment could be repositioned over several weeks or months to cover all project locations within the ATP, providing the City with a clearer picture of existing conditions.
64 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
64 of 2882
For future Council-approved and initiated bikeway projects, staff proposes a beforeand-after evaluation for Class II, Class IIB, and Class IV bikeways. As a project moves into design, staff will begin a data collection period at the project location to determine existing volumes. Counters would be deployed at a set of locations along the project limits to record bicycle activity on typical weekdays and weekends. At the same time, staff would track reported collisions using Sheriff reports and SWITRS. This establishes a clear pre-project picture of both ridership and safety.

After the project is constructed and open to the public, and a suitable amount of time has passed to account for possible changes in transportation behavior, staff will repeat this process during the post-project period, using the same locations and equipment to ensure comparable data. With these two datasets, staff can calculate changes in average daily and peak-period bicycle volumes, as well as changes in collision rates. The key metric will not just be the number of collisions, but collisions relative to the number of bicyclists or pedestrians. A successful project will be one in which more people use the facility while the collision rate per rider remains the same or decreases. This will be referred to as the Safety Plus Mode Shift (SPMS) rate, which aligns with Vision Zero and Climate Action Plan objectives.

To proceed with this approach, the City will need to either purchase equipment or contract for services. One option is to purchase a set of movable counters. This would involve an upfront capital cost but would give the City full control over how and when the equipment is deployed. This approach would also build internal expertise over time. Another option is to lease equipment or work with a contractor that provides turnkey services, including counter deployment, data processing, and reporting. This method would reduce the upfront cost and technical burden, but could be more expensive if used intensively over many years. A hybrid approach is also possible, in which the City purchases a small number of cameras for ongoing monitoring and supplements them with leased equipment or contractor services for larger, one-time efforts such as the initial citywide baseline.

Staff envisions this work rolling out in phases. In the near term, following Council direction, staff would refine this evaluation approach, identify preferred equipment and procurement approaches, and bring forward a funding request. Once counters or services are secured, staff will conduct the citywide baseline count at ATP priority project locations. As ATP individual projects advance, staff will complete the one-year 65 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
65 of 2882
before-and-after evaluations and prepare project summaries for Council and the community that describe changes in volumes and safety. Ultimately, this data can be incorporated into public-facing tools such as dashboards or annual reports for residents to review projects.

This approach is intended to improve transparency and accountability around active transportation projects. It gives Council a simple way to compare projects and project types, it allows designs to be refined based on what works best in practice, and it creates a feedback loop between adopted policy goals and actual outcomes. By committing to this measurement approach, the City can signal that success is defined not only by miles of bikeway delivered, but by quantifiable improvements in safety and mode shift toward sustainable transportation.

If Council supports this approach, staff will incorporate these guidelines into the final ATP as an internal policy that then applies to new ATP projects. 66 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
66 of 2882
67 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
67 of 2882
68 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
68 of 2882
69 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
69 of 2882
70 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
70 of 2882
VISUAL GLOSSARY – BIKE FACILITIES
Rolling Improvements
Shared-Use Path
Paved paths shared
by people walking
and rolling completely
separated from
motor vehicle trac.

Comfortable for people
of all ages and abilities.

Example: Regnart Creek
Trail.

Buered
Bike Lane
A conventional bike
lane paired with a
bu
er space that
separates the bike lane
from adjacent motor
vehicle travel lane and/
or parking lane.

Example: Bollinger Rd.

Neighborhood
Bike Route
Signed bike route,
sharing the roadway with
motor vehicles on quiet
neighborhood streets.

Includes signs, street
markings, and substantial
trac calming.

Example: Price Ave.

Separated
Bikeway
An on-street bike lane
that is separated from
motor vehicle trac
by a vertical barrier
such as bollards, raised
medians, planters, or
parked cars.

Ex
School.
ample: Lawson Middle
Bike Lane
Dedicated lane for
bicycle travel adjacent
to trac. Separated
from motor vehicle
trac or parking by
painted line.

Example: Wolfe Rd.

Most Separation Least Separation

71 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
71 of 2882
VISUAL GLOSSARY – PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Walking Improvements
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon
Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFBs) are a type of active warning beacon used at unsignalized crossings. They are designed to increase motor vehicle yielding compliance on multi-lane or highvolume roadways. Activated with a push-button.

Leading Pedestrian Interval
Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs) give a walk signal to pedestrian pedestrians to enter the crosswalk before drivers start moving, increasing pedestrian visibility to turning drivers.

Advanced Stop/Yield Bar
Advanced stop or yield bar markings
are placed in advance of a crosswalk to
discourage drivers from encroaching on
the crosswalk.

Median Refuge Islands
Median refuge islands help improve access for people walking by increasing visibility and allowing pedestrians to cross one direction Curb Extensions
Curb extensions minimize exposure for people crossing the street by shortening crossing distance and giving them a better chance to see and be seen before committing to crossing.

Curb Ramp
Curb ramps provide access between the sidewalk and roadway for people using wheelchairs, strollers, walkers, hand carts, bicycles, and for people who have trouble stepping up and down high curbs.

In-Street Crossing Sign
In-street crossing signs reinforce the driver
requirement to yield the right of way to
pedestrians at designated pedestrian
crossing locations.

Visibility Improvements
crossing locations increases vehicle
operators’ ability to see crosswalk and
pedestrian users.

High-Visibility Crosswalk
High-visibility crosswalks are marked with
thick bars, drawing additional attention
and awareness to the crossing. In school
zones, these crossings are yellow instead
of the standard white color.

Pedestrian crossing improvements were classified into three groups.

Each of these groups represents a “basket” of options, some of which may be considered for use at each location shown in the pedestrian recommendations map. Typologies will be applied to intersections on a case-by-case basis based on City engineering judgment.

Group A—Crossing Improvements Group B—Geometric Changes Group C—Tra
c Control Improvements
72 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
72 of 2882

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
26-14833 Agenda Date: 4/7/2026
Agenda #: 1.

Subject: Proclamation in recognition of April as Donate Life Month.

Present proclamation recognizing April as Donate Life Month.

CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/3/2026
powered by Legistar™ 73
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
73 of 2882
74 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
74 of 2882

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
26-14933 Agenda Date: 4/7/2026
Agenda #: 2.

Subject: Proclamation in recognition of April as Fair Housing Month.

Present proclamation recognizing April as Fair Housing Month.

CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/3/2026
powered by Legistar™ 75
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
75 of 2882
76 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
76 of 2882

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
26-14934 Agenda Date: 4/7/2026
Agenda #: 3.

Subject: Approval of February 28, 2026 City Council meeting minutes.

Approve the February 28, 2026 City Council meeting minutes.

CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/3/2026
powered by Legistar™ 77
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
77 of 2882

DRAFT MINUTES

CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL
Saturday, February 28, 2026

SPECIAL MEETING
At 9:34 a.m., Mayor Kitty Moore called the Special City Council Meeting to order in the Creekside Park Building, 10455 Miller Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014 and via Teleconference.

ROLL CALL

Present: Mayor Kitty Moore, Vice Mayor Liang Chao, and Councilmembers J.R. Fruen, Sheila Mohan, and R “Ray” Wang. Absent: None.

COUNCIL WORKSHOP

1. Subject: City Council Governance and Strategic Planning Workshop.

Recommended Action: Receive and discuss presentation regarding City Council Governance and Strategic Planning.

Written communications for this item included consultant presentations, Attributes of Exceptional Councils Article, and A Key Ingredient for Success: An Effective City Council/City Manager Relationship Article.

Mayor Moore opened the public comment period and the following members of the public spoke.

Cathy Helgerson
Mayor Moore closed the public comment period.

Consultant Kevin Duggan gave a presentation on Key Strategies for High Functioning City Councils & Staff.

Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.
78 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
78 of 2882
City Council Minutes February 28, 2026

Council discussed the following workshop themes:
• Relationships and Governance Culture:

Interactions between councilmembers, staff, and commissions affect overall effectiveness. Teamwork and positive relationships support outcomes and maintain a strong workplace culture.
• Complexity of the Council Role:

Operating under competing community perspectives, public perception, limited resources, and the need to function as a team despite not choosing one another. • Constructive Conflict and Trust:

Disagreement is valuable when focused on ideas but becomes counterproductive if it turns personal. Mutual trust and respect are essential for collaboration and effective decision-making.
• Governance Focus:

The need to transition from campaign-oriented behavior to governance-focused actions, including collaboration, coalition building, problem-solving, and influencing one another through credibility and engagement. • Communication and Frameworks:

The Brown Act restricts collective deliberation outside of noticed meetings but does not prevent appropriate one-on-one dialogue. Governance tools, such as codes of conduct, are most effective when guiding professional behavior rather than enforcing discipline.
• Accountability, Public Engagement, and Resilience:

Balancing accountability and collaboration while encouraging improvement rather than conflict. Noted the impact of public comment and external pressures, the importance of distinguishing highly active individuals from the broader community, and the need to maintain focus on governance responsibilities.

Trust-building and resilience in the face of criticism and differing views are essential to effective public service.

The following items were captured on flip charts by Councilmembers during the workshop discussion.

From Fellow Council Members
Councilmembers identified the following key needs to support their work together:
• Accessibility for Council meetings
• Honest and constructive dialogue
• Ability to listen and appreciate differing positions
• Avoiding political or personal attacks
• Supporting the Chair and meeting structure
79 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
79 of 2882
City Council Minutes February 28, 2026

• Respect and focus on agenda topics
• Mutual respect for priorities and working styles
• Using prep sessions effectively and asking questions in advance • Supporting efficient and well-run meetings
• Awareness of Council/Manager form of government
From City Manager/Staff to Get Jobs Done
Councilmembers noted that staff support is most effective when it provides:
• No surprises and respect for Council process
• Accountability and prioritization of residents’ needs • Responsiveness to the public
• Equal access and fair treatment of all members of the public • Trust in staff expertise
• Total Quality Management (TQM) to find improvement, not assign blame • Responsiveness to informational memos
Staff Needs from Council
Councilmembers identified the following supports as important to help staff get the work done:
• Respect for their time, expertise, and efforts
• Clear understanding of Council direction
• No surprises in requests or decisions
• Appreciation of staff work
• Early submission of questions to allow preparation
Council consented to bring back Kevin Duggan for a follow-up workshop session to continue the discussion but using a more interactive, scenario-based format.

Mayor Moore recessed the meeting at 11:12 a.m. The meeting reconvened at 11:21 a.m. with all Councilmembers present.

City Manager Tina Kapoor introduced the item and discussed the development of the City’s Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan is a high-level governance tool intended to align Council and staff, provide clarity and shared expectations, and guide how key City functions operate together, including the budget, Capital Improvement Program (CIP), and City Work Program.

Consultant Drew Corbett gave a presentation on the City’s Strategic Planning framework.

Council discussion focused on the following:
• City’s strategic planning framework and proposed updates to the City Work Program (CWP) process
80 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
80 of 2882
City Council Minutes February 28, 2026

• Council-adopted two-year strategic vision framework from March 2025, including six Council goals and three focus areas guiding the current two-year work program
• Proposed two-year cycle with milestones, including mid-cycle updates, postelection priority setting, and alignment with budget development • Process for modifying the framework with timelines and deliverables • Alignment of the CWP with the operating budget and five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
Councilmembers asked questions and made comments, including:
• Limited completion of work program items relative to the total number of items • How mid-cycle adjustments account for incomplete items • Whether the current number of items is realistic given available resources • More structured prioritization framework, including categorization into essential services, priorities, and lower-priority items • Potential use AI tools to improve efficiency and decision-making. • Relationship between the work program and broader operations, noting that the work program reflects only part of ongoing activities and may not capture all operational workload or emerging issues
• Need for clearer prioritization, better alignment with operational demands, and more transparent reporting of completed and ongoing work Staff will bring refinements to the strategic planning framework back to Council for further consideration.

ADJOURNMENT
At 12:16 p.m., Mayor Kitty Moore adjourned the Special City Council Meeting.

Minutes prepared by:
__________________________________
Kirsten Squarcia, Recording Secretary
81 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
81 of 2882

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
25-14672 Agenda Date: 4/7/2026
Agenda #: 4.

Subject: Approval of March 17, 2026 City Council meeting minutes.

Approve the March 17, 2026 City Council meeting minutes.

CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/3/2026
powered by Legistar™ 82
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
82 of 2882

DRAFT MINUTES

CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, March 17, 2026

SPECIAL MEETING
At 5:45 p.m., Mayor Moore called the Special City Council Meeting to order in the Cupertino Community Hall Council Chamber, 10350 Torre Avenue and via teleconference.

ROLL CALL

Present: Mayor Kitty Moore, Vice Mayor Liang Chao, and Councilmembers J.R. Fruen, and Sheila Mohan. Absent: Councilmember R “Ray” Wang.

STUDY SESSION

1. Subject: Study Session on the Housing Development Project at 10333 N. Wolfe Road.

Recommended Action: Receive Santa Clara County staff’s presentation and provide feedback on the project.

Written communications for this item included emails to Council, supplemental report and presentation from Santa Clara County.

Consuelo Hernandez, Deputy County Executive for the County of Santa Clara; Andrea Osgood, Chief of Real Estate Development and Executive Vice President of Eden Housing; and Sarah Vaccaro, Principal Architect at Architects FORA, gave a joint presentation.

Mayor Moore opened the public comment period and the following members of the public spoke:

Jennifer Griffin
Cory Wolbach, representing Silicon Valley at Home
Peggy Griffin
Stuart Chessen
Pamela Hershey
83 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
83 of 2882
City Council Minutes March 17, 2026

Housing Commissioner Connie Cunningham (representing self) Alex Shoor, representing Catalyze SV
Jean Bedord
Venkat Ranganathan
Louise Saadati

Mayor Moore closed the public comment period.

Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.

Council received the presentation from Santa Clara County staff on the Housing Development Project at 10333 N. Wolfe Road.

ADJOURNMENT
At 6:41 p.m., Mayor Kitty Moore adjourned the Special City Council Meeting.

REGULAR MEETING
At 6:47 p.m., Mayor Moore called the Regular City Council Meeting to order in the Cupertino Community Hall Council Chamber, 10350 Torre Avenue and via teleconference; and Teleconference Location Pursuant to Gov. Code 54953(b)(2): The Rosewood Hotel, Lobby, 2825 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025.

ROLL CALL

Present: Mayor Kitty Moore, Vice Mayor Liang Chao, and Councilmembers J.R. Fruen, Sheila Mohan, and R “Ray” Wang (participated virtually).

Councilmember Wang confirmed that he was in the noticed public location, that he had posted the notice of the meeting at his remote location and that no other individuals over the age of 18 were with him and that no one had indicated to him that they were intending to make public comment or address the Council.

CLOSED SESSION REPORT – None.

CEREMONIAL ITEMS – None.

POSTPONEMENTS AND ORDERS OF THE DAY
MOTION: Moore moved and Mohan seconded to continue Item No. 12, to a special City Council 84 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
84 of 2882
City Council Minutes March 17, 2026

meeting on April 1, 2026, at 6:30 p.m. The motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Moore, Chao, Fruen, Mohan and Wang. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Written communications for this item included emails to the Council.

The following members of the public spoke:

Jennifer Griffin discussed Highway 17 traffic safety and Senate Bill (SB) 330 and loss of retail.

Sayareh Farsio (representing group) discussed truck noise from Lehigh Quarry.

At 7:01 p.m., Councilmember Wang left the meeting.

Veronica Lentfer (representing group) discussed housing evacuation safety.

Peggy Griffin discussed Below Market Rate (BMR) housing, public health and safety, and truck traffic noise.

Ying Sosic discussed the use of rat poison.

Rhoda Fry discussed evacuation safety, Lehigh traffic, and Planning Commission and City Council agenda packets.

Planning Commissioner San Rao (representing self) discussed County Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR), Health Center, Sheriff's budget, Foothill Multimodal Study, and quarry.

Planning Commissioner Tracy Kosolcharoen (representing self) (virtually) discussed an evacuation study and Assembly Bill (AB) 130.

Vikram Saxena (virtually) discussed fire safety and code compliance, architectural and site plan documentation and a technical study.

CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 1-9)
Mayor Moore opened the public comment period and the following members of the public spoke:

Peggy Griffin (Item 4)
85 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
85 of 2882
City Council Minutes March 17, 2026

Mayor Moore closed the public comment period.

MOTION: Mohan moved and Chao seconded to approve Consent Calendar Items 1-9. The motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Moore, Chao, Fruen, and Mohan. Noes: None.

Abstain: None. Absent: Wang.

1. Subject: Approval of February 24, 2026 City Council meeting minutes Recommended Action: Approve the February 24, 2026 City Council meeting minutes

2. Subject: Approval of March 3, 2026 City Council meeting minutes Recommended Action: Approve the March 3, 2026 City Council meeting minutes

3. Subject: Ratifying Accounts Payable for the periods ending February 13, 2026, and February 27, 2026
Recommended Action: A. Adopt Resolution No. 26-027 ratifying Accounts Payable for the Period ending February 13, 2026; and
B. Adopt Resolution No. 26-028 ratifying Accounts Payable for the Period ending February 27, 2026

4. Subject: Review of Future agenda items requested by City Councilmembers (“TBD List”).

Recommended Action: Review the TBD list and accept the staff recommendations for all items.

5. Subject: Award of Agreement to Tyler Technologies, Inc., for the two-year implementation of a new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system in the amount of $1,785,144, along with three additional years of SaaS maintenance and support totaling $775,956, for a not-to-exceed total of $2,561,100; Authorize the City Manager to extend the Contract annually for up to five additional years at an annual escalation rate of 3%, for a total not-to-exceed of $1,424,907, provided pricing and services remain acceptable.

Recommended Action: 1. Approve a five-year agreement with Tyler Technologies, Inc., for the Tyler ERP system for a total not-to-exceed amount of $2,561,100;

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the Contract with Tyler Technologies when all conditions have been met; and

3. Authorize the City Manager to extend the Contract annually for up to five additional years at an annual escalation rate of 3%, for a total not-to-exceed of $1,424,907, provided pricing and services remain acceptable.

Written communications for this item included a supplemental report.

6. Subject: Approval of a fifth amendment to Granicus, LLC., to renew Enterprise Government Experience Cloud Services subscription for $578,626 plus a contingency of 86 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
86 of 2882
City Council Minutes March 17, 2026

$57,863 over three years, for a not-to-exceed amount of $636,489.

Recommended Action: Authorize the City Manager to execute the Fifth Amendment to the agreement with Granicus, LLC., to renew Enterprise Government Experience Cloud Services subscription for a three-year not-to-exceed amount of $636,489, within the total not-to-exceed agreement amount of $1,334,026.

7. Subject: 2025 General Plan and Housing Element Annual Progress Report.

Recommended Action: Receive the General Plan and Housing Element Annual Progress Report for the 2025 Reporting Year (Attachments A, B, and C).

8. Subject: Award a construction contract for roofing system repairs at Quinlan Community Center and Sports Center to Roofing & Solar Construction, Inc. in the amount of $650,000; Authorization of construction contingency amount of $65,000 (10%) for a total contract amount of $715,000.

Recommended Action: 1. Approve the award of construction contract for the Sports Center and Quinlan Community Center Roofing System Replacement Project in the amount of $650,000 to Roofing & Solar Construction, Inc.;

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the construction contract when all conditions have been met; and

3. Authorize the Director of Public Works to execute any necessary change orders up to a construction contingency amount of $65,000 (10%) for a total contract amount of $715,000.

9. Subject: Award a construction contract for the 2025 Concrete Reconstruction Project to Villalobos & Associates, Inc. for removal and replacement of concrete curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and pedestrian ramps in the amount of $1,105,202.14; Authorize construction contingency to allow for unforeseen conditions in the amount of $110,520.21 (10%) for a total contract amount of $1,215,722.35.

Recommended Action: 1. Award a construction contract for the 2025 Concrete Reconstruction Project (project number 2025-103) in the amount of $1,105,202.14 to Villalobos & Associates, Inc.;

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the construction contract when all conditions have been met; and

3. Authorize the Director of Public Works to execute any necessary change orders up to a construction contingency amount of $110,520.21 (10%) for a total contract amount of $1,215,722.35.

ACTION CALENDAR

10. Subject: Follow-Up Analysis of Potential Revenue Ballot Measure Options (Continued on February 19, 2026)
87 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
87 of 2882
City Council Minutes March 17, 2026

Recommended Action: Receive the follow-up analysis regarding potential revenue ballot measure options and provide direction to staff regarding further evaluation or pursuit of tax ballot measures for potential revenue measures, including business license tax restructuring, Utility Users Tax considerations, and local sales tax options.

Written communications for this item included emails to the Council and staff presentation.

Acting Director of Administrative Services Jonathan Orozco gave a presentation.

Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.

Mayor Moore opened the public comment period and the following members of the public spoke:

Peggy Griffin
Rhoda Fry
Planning Commissioner San Rao (representing self) (virtually) Bicycle Pedestrian Commissioner Muni Madhdhipatla (representing self) (virtually) Senior Advisor Ken Duran with HDL answered questions.

Mayor Moore closed the public comment period.

Moore moved Chao seconded to direct staff to conduct polling for the Utility Users Tax (UUT) at the current rate, with a potential slight increase, with some modernization of the services included, and add a brief question about parkland ballot measure. The motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Moore, Chao, Fruen, and Mohan. Noes:

None. Abstain: None. Absent: Wang.

At 8:29 p.m., Mayor Moore recessed the meeting. The meeting reconvened at 8:36 p.m. with all Councilmembers present (Wang absent).

11. Subject: Blesch Property Study on Opportunities for Optimal Use Recommended Action: Receive the presentation and accept staff recommendation or other available options on the future use of the property:

1. Direct staff to further evaluate concepts and costs associated with demolition of the existing structure and initiate planning for conversion of the property to passive park and recreation uses, with no new building structures and minimal grading to avoid floodway impacts (staff recommendation);

2. Modify the Scope of Park Improvements; or

3. Retain the Existing Structure; or
88 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
88 of 2882
City Council Minutes March 17, 2026

4. Build a New Structure; or

5. Defer Action.

Written communications for this item included emails to the Council and staff presentation.

Director of Public Works Chad Mosley gave a presentation.

Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.

Mayor Moore opened the public comment period and the following members of the public spoke:

Jennifer Griffin
Parks and Recreation Commissioner and Economic Development Committee Member Claudio Bono (representing self)
Rhoda Fry
Danessa Techmanski (virtually)
Planning Commissioner San Rao (representing self) (virtually) Councilmembers asked questions and made comments.

Mayor Moore closed the public comment period.

MOTION: Moore moved and Chao seconded the staff recommendation, Option 1, with an amendment to convert to a park with native plantings, remove the structure and return it to nature, and include some pathways that are safely away from the street, with the slope down from Stevens Creek Boulevard.

FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Fruen made a friendly amendment to coordinate with the Historical Society first before moving forward. (Moore and Chao did not accept this friendly amendment and it was not included in the motion) FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Chao made a friendly amendment to add outdoor seating (Moore accepted the friendly amendment)
FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Chao made a friendly amendment to exclude a labyrinth (Moore accepted the friendly amendment)
The amended motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Moore, Chao, Fruen, and Mohan. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: Wang.
89 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
89 of 2882
City Council Minutes March 17, 2026

PUBLIC HEARINGS

12. Subject: Consider a Tentative Map, Architectural and Site Approval, and Tree Removal Permit for the construction of a 51-unit townhome condominium development on Housing Element Priority Housing Sites 25 through 28. The project utilizes Senate Bill 330 and provisions of State Density Bonus law. (Application No(s): TM-2024-009, ASA-2024-015, TR-2024-044; Applicant: SummerHill Homes, LLC; Location: 10857, 10867, 10877, and 10887 Linda Vista Drive; APNs: 356-06-001, -002, -003, and -004).

Recommended Action: 1. Find the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);

2. Make the required findings of No Net Loss (SB 166); and

3. Approve the following permits:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 26-029 approving Tentative Final Map (TM-2024-009) (Attachment A);
b. Adopt Resolution No. 26-030 approving Architectural & Site Approval Permit (ASA-2024-015) (Attachment B); and
c. Adopt Resolution No. 26-031 approving Tree Removal Permit (TR-2024-044) (Attachment C).

Written communications for this item included emails to the Council, staff presentation, supplemental report, and Attachment U - Plan set.

As noted under Postponements and Orders of the Day, this item was continued to a special City Council meeting on April 1, 2026, at 6:30 p.m.

ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR – None

CITY MANAGER REPORT

13. Subject: City Manager Report
City Manager Tina Kapoor included the City Manager Newsletter, which includes recent highlights and upcoming events as provided in the published agenda.

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - CONTINUED – None.

COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS

14. Subject: Councilmember Reports
90 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
90 of 2882
City Council Minutes March 17, 2026

Councilmembers included reports on their various committees and events as provided in the published agenda.

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
There were no requests from Councilmembers for future agenda items.

15. Subject: Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report
A tentative council meeting agenda calendar was provided in the published agenda.

ADJOURNMENT
At 9:12 p.m., Mayor Kitty Moore adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting.

Minutes prepared by:
________________________________
Lauren Sapudar, City Clerk
91 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
91 of 2882

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
25-14436 Agenda Date: 4/7/2026
Agenda #: 5.

Subject: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for February 2026.

Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for February 2026.

CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/3/2026
powered by Legistar™ 92
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
92 of 2882

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT

CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3220
CUPERTINO.GOV
1 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Date: April 7, 2026
Subject
Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for February 2026 Recommended Action
Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for February 2026 Reasons for Recommendation
The Monthly Investment Report is a routine report provided to City Council and is provided as Attachment A with this report.

Sustainability Impact
No sustainability impact.

Fiscal Impact
No fiscal impact.

City Work Program Item/Description
None.

Council Goal
Fiscal Strategy
California Environmental Quality Act
Not applicable.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Jonathan Orozco, Acting Director of Administrative Services and City Treasurer
Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager
Attachments:

A – Chandler Investment Report February 2026
93 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
93 of 2882

INVESTMENT REPORT
City of Cupertino | As of February 28, 2026
CHANDLER ASSET MANAGEMENT | chandlerasset.com
Chandler Team:

For questions about your account, please call (800) 317-4747, or contact [email protected]
Information contained herein is confidential. We urge you to compare this statement to the one you receive from your qualified custodian. Please see Important Disclosures at the end of the statement. 94 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
94 of 2882

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ECONOMIC UPDATE

ACCOUNT PROFILE

CONSOLIDATED INFORMATION

PORTFOLIO HOLDINGS

TRANSACTIONS
1 95
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
95 of 2882

ECONOMIC UPDATE
2 96
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
96 of 2882
▪
▪
▪
Recent economic data has signaled moderating inflation alongside a continued rebalancing in labor market conditions. Price pressures continues to run modestly above the Federal Reserve’s longer‑run objective, while the unemployment rate dropped to 4.3%. As the data flow normalizes, the Chandler team anticipates additional yield curve steepening as the Federal Reserve gradually guides the policy rate toward a more neutral range. One additional 25 basis point rate cut may come in the first half of 2026, while U.S. trade and fiscal policy continue to represent important sources of elevated market uncertainty.

The Federal Reserve’s January Federal Open Market Committee meeting concluded with policymakers leaving the target range unchanged at

3.50%–3.75% after three consecutive 25‑basis‑point cuts at the end of 2025. However, officials remain divided on the appropriate path forward, with Governors Christopher Waller and Stephen Miran dissenting in favor of an additional reduction. The future policy regime also began to take shape as President Trump announced Kevin Warsh as his nominee for the next Federal Reserve Chair.

The US Treasury yield curve flattened in February, as the 2-year Treasury yield fell 15 basis points to 3.38%, the 5-year Treasury was down 29 basis points to 3.50%, and the 10-year Treasury yield was 30 basis points lower at 3.94%. The spread between the 2-year and 10-year Treasury yield points on the curve was 15 basis points tighter from January at +56 basis points at February month-end. The spread between the 2-year Treasury and 10-year Treasury yield one year ago was +22 basis points. The spread between the 3-month and 10-year Treasury yield points on the curve was +28 basis points in February versus +58 basis points in January.

ECONOMIC UPDATE
3 97
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
97 of 2882
-400
-200
0 200
400
600
800
1,000
MOM Change In Thousands (000's)
Nonfarm Payroll (000's)
Non-farm Payroll (000's)
3-month average (000's)

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%
Unemployment Rate
Underemployment Rate (U6)
Unemployment Rate (U3)
Rate (%)
The February Nonfarm Payrolls report showed an unexpected decline of 92,000 jobs, contrasting with expectations for a 55,000 increase. The loss partly reflected a month-long strike involving more than 30,000 Kaiser Permanente employees, while severe winter weather further weighed on hiring. Even so, payroll declines were broad-based across several industries. The unemployment rate rose to 4.4% in February, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The unexpectedly weak jobs report may prompt renewed concerns about the labor market’srecent stability.

Source: US Department of Labor Source: US Department of Labor

EMPLOYMENT
4 98
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
98 of 2882
0 2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
Job Openings
Recession
Historical Average In Thousands (000's) The Labor Department’s Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) reported that job openings fell to 6.5 million in December, reducing the ratio of openings to unemployed workers to 0.9—the lowest level since the peak in early 2022. The decline in vacancies, coupled with slower hiring, indicates a continued softening in labor demand, even as employers remain reluctant to cut staff. Layoffs and discharges rose in the transportation, utilities, and warehousing sectors but declined in finance and insurance.

Source: US Department of Labor

JOB OPENINGS & LABOR TURNOVER SURVEY
5 99
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
99 of 2882

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

9.0%

10.0%
Consumer Price Index (CPI)
CPI YOY % Change
Core CPI YOY % Change
YOY (%) Change

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%
Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE)
PCE Price Deflator YOY
% Change
PCE Core Deflator YOY
% Change
Fed Target
YOY (%) Change
Headline inflation moderated in January with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rising 0.2% for the month, down from 0.3% in December. On an annual basis, headline CPI eased to 2.4% from 2.7% a year earlier. Core CPI, which excludes volatile food and energy prices, edged up to 0.3% in January from 0.2% the previous month, while the annual rate eased slightly to 2.5% from 2.6%. The Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) Index for December, released on February 20, showed both headline and core inflation rising 0.4%, which was 0.1% higher than expectations.

On an annual basis, headline PCE inflation advanced 2.9% and Core PCE, which excludes food and energy, rose 3.0% in December.

Source: US Department of Labor Source: US Department of Commerce

INFLATION
6 100
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
100 of 2882

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%
Retail Sales YOY % Change
YOY (%) Change
The Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index rose to 91.2 in February from an upwardly revised 89.0 in January. Confidence improved amid signs of labor market stability and moderating inflation. However, the survey noted an increase in respondents citing concerns about the overall cost of goods as well as political and trade uncertainties. Retail sales edged down 0.2% in January from December, driven by a decline in vehicle sales, but were up 3.2% on a seasonally adjusted annual basis. The control group measure, which feeds directly into GDP calculations, rose 0.3% from the prior month, matching expectations. Adverse winter weather continued to restrain retail activity during the month.
0 20
40 60
80 100
120
140
160
Index Level
Consumer Confidence
Recession
Source: US Department of Commerce Source: The Conference Board All time high is 144.70 (1/31/00); All time low is 25.30 (2/28/09)

CONSUMER
7 101
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
101 of 2882
-25.0%
-20.0%
-15.0%
-10.0%
-5.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%
Leading Economic Indicators (LEI)
Recession
YOY (%) Change
-1.00
-0.75
-0.50
-0.25

0.00 0.25

0.50 0.75

1.00 Chicago Fed National Activity Index (CFNAI)
Recession
3 Month Average
The Chicago Fed National Activity Index (CFNAI) rose to 0.18 in January, indicating that U.S. economic activity expanded above its historical trend, following a -0.21 reading in December. The Chicago Fed reported that all four broad categories of indicators used to construct the index improved from the prior month. As a result, the index’s three‑month moving average increased to -0.06, up from -0.29 in December. A zero value for the CFNAI corresponds to economic growth at the historical average rate. The Conference Board’s Leading Economic Index (LEI) declined 0.2% in December, marking its fifth consecutive monthly decrease after a 0.3% drop in November. On a year-over-year basis, the index fell 3.9%. According to the Conference Board, persistently weak consumer expectations followed by new orders were the leading negative contributors. Overall, the LEI continues to signal slower economic growth into 2026.

Source: The Conference Board Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago

LEADING INDICATORS OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITY
8 102
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
102 of 2882
0 200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2,000
2,200
2,400
In Thousands of Units
Annualized Housing Starts
Multi Family Housing Starts
Single Family Housing Starts
The December S&P Cotality Case‑Shiller 20‑City Composite Home Price Index posted a 1.3% year‑over‑year gain in 2025 on a non‑seasonally adjusted basis—the weakest annual increase since 2011. Notably, inflation outpaced home price appreciation in the second half of the year, ending a 10-year trend of positive real returns. Housing starts increased 6.2% to an annualized rate of 1,404,000 in December adding 981 thousand single-family home starts and 402 thousand multifamily home starts. Meanwhile, the Freddie Mac 30‑year fixed mortgage rate continued to edge lower, reaching 5.98% by the end of February.

Source: US Department of Commerce Source: S&P
-20.0%
-16.0%
-12.0%
-8.0%
-4.0%

0.0%

4.0%

8.0%

12.0%

16.0%

20.0%

24.0%
S&P/Case-Shiller 20 City Composite Home Price Index
Recession
YOY (%) Change

HOUSING
9 103
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
103 of 2882
40 45
50 55
60 65
70 Institute of Supply Management (ISM) Surveys
ISM Manufacturing ISM Services

EXPANDING

CONTRACTING
The Institute for Supply Management’s (ISM) Manufacturing and Services Indexes both signaled expansion in February. The ISM Manufacturing Index rose to 52.4, marking a second consecutive month of growth following contractions in nearly all of the prior 40 months. The ISM Services Index increased to 56.1, its 20th straight month in expansion territory and the fastest pace since mid-2022. With both measures remaining above the 50 threshold for a second consecutive month, ISM data point to a solid start for the U.S. economy in 2026. (Readings above 50 indicate expansion, while those below 50 reflect contraction.) Source: Institute for Supply Management

SURVEY BASED MEASURES
10 104
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
104 of 2882
Components of GDP 3/25 6/25 9/25 12/25

0.4% 1.7% 2.3% 1.6%

3.8% -2.7% 0.0% 0.7%
-4.7% 4.8% 1.6% 0.1%
-0.4% -0.4% 0.2% -1.2%

0.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3%
-0.6% 3.8% 4.4% 1.4%
State and Local (Consumption and Gross
Investment)
Personal Consumption Expenditures
Gross Private Domestic Investment
Net Exports and Imports
Federal Government Expenditures
Total
-10.0%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%
Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
GDP QOQ % Change
GDP YOY % Change
Source: US Department of Commerce Source: US Department of Commerce The advanced estimate for real gross domestic product (Real GDP) decelerated to 1.4% in the fourth quarter. The deceleration from 4.4% in the third quarter reflects downturns in government spending, exports, and slower consumer spending. The consensus projection calls for 2.3% growth in the first quarter and 2.5% for the full year 2026.

GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT (GDP)
11 105
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
105 of 2882
Source: Federal Reserve Source: Bloomberg
0 1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
7,000,000
8,000,000
9,000,000
10,000,000
Federal Reserve Balance Sheet Assets
Recession
In $ millions
The Federal Reserve left its benchmark interest rate unchanged in January, keeping the target range at 3.50% to 3.75% after the December quarter‑point cut that was justified by signs of softening in the labor market. Policymakers maintained a cautious tone, acknowledging that inflation has continued to moderate but emphasizing that the outlook remains uncertain and that future adjustments will depend on incoming data. The Fed minutes, released in February, indicated several participants would have supported ‘two-sided’ language on the go forward rate path, implying some possibility the next move by the FOMC could be an increase in the Fed Funds rate. The Committee also reaffirmed its December decision to halt balance sheet runoff and to reinvest principal and interest payments from its securities holdings, signaling a desire to maintain ample reserves and support orderly market functioning while it assesses the effects of earlier tightening and recent rate cuts.

FEDERAL RESERVE

0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

6.00%
Effective Federal Funds Rate
Recession
Yield (%)
12 106
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
106 of 2882
Source: Bloomberg Source: Bloomberg

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%
US Treasury Note Yields
2-Year
5-Year
10-Year
Yield (%)

0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

3.5%

4.0%

4.5%

5.0%
US Treasury Yield Curve
Feb-26
Nov-25
Feb-25
Yield (%)
At the end of February, the 2-year yield was 61 basis points lower, and the 10-year yield was 27 basis points lower, year-over-year. The spread between the 2-year and 10-year Treasury yield points on the curve decreased to +56 basis points at February month-end versus +71 basis points at January month-end. The prior 2-year/10-year yield curve inversion, which spanned from July 2022 to August 2024, was historically long. The average historical spread (since 2005) is about +95 basis points. The spread between the 3-month and 10-year Treasury yield points on the curve was +28 basis points in February versus +58 basis points in January.

BOND YIELDS
13 107
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
107 of 2882

ACCOUNT PROFILE
14 108
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
108 of 2882

OBJECTIVES
Investment Objectives
The City of Cupertino's investment objectives, in order of priority, are to provide safety to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio, provide sufficient liquidity for cash needs and a market rate of return consistent with the investment program.

Chandler Asset Management Performance Objective
The performance objective for the portfolio is to earn a total rate of return through a market cycle that is equal to or above the return on the benchmark index.

Strategy
In order to achieve these objectives, the portfolio invests in high quality fixed incomes securities consistent with the investment policy and California Government Code. 15 109
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
109 of 2882

STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Rules Name Limit Actual Compliance
Status Notes

AGENCY MORTGAGE SECURITIES
Max % (MV) 100.0 11.5 Compliant
Max % Issuer (MV; Agencies & Agency CMOs) 25.0 11.5 Compliant Max Maturity (Years) 5.0 4.9 Compliant

ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES (ABS)
Max % (MV; Non Agency ABS & MBS) 20.0 7.6 Compliant
Max % Issuer (MV) 5.0 0.8 Compliant
Max Maturity (Years) 5 4 Compliant
Min Rating (AA- by 1) 0.0 0.0 Compliant

BANKERS' ACCEPTANCES
Max % (MV) 40.0 0.0 Compliant
Max % Issuer (MV) 5.0 0.0 Compliant
Max Maturity (Days) 180 0.0 Compliant
Min Rating (A-1 by 1 or A- by 1) 0.0 0.0 Compliant

CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT PLACEMENT SERVICE
(CDARS)
Max % (MV) 30.0 0.0 Compliant
Max % Issuer (MV) 5.0 0.0 Compliant
Max Maturity (Years) 5.0 0.0 Compliant
COLLATERALIZED TIME DEPOSITS (NONNEGOTIABLE CD/TD)
Max % (MV; FDIC & Collateralized CD/TD) 30.0 0.0 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV) 5.0 0.0 Compliant
Max Maturity (Years) 5.0 0.0 Compliant

COMMERCIAL PAPER
Max % (MV) 25.0 0.0 Compliant
Max % Issuer (MV) 5.0 0.0 Compliant
Max Maturity (Days) 270 0.0 Compliant
Min Rating (A-1 by 1 or A- by 1) 0.0 0.0 Compliant

CORPORATE MEDIUM TERM NOTES
16 110
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
110 of 2882

STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Rules Name Limit Actual Compliance
Status Notes
Max % (MV) 30.0 27.6 Compliant
Max % Issuer (MV) 5.0 1.3 Compliant
Max Maturity (Years) 5 4 Compliant
Min Rating (A- by 1) 0.0 0.0 Compliant

FDIC INSURED TIME DEPOSITS (NON-NEGOTIABLE
CD/TD)
Max % (MV; FDIC & Collateralized CD/TD) 30.0 0.0 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV) 5.0 0.0 Compliant
Max Maturity (Years) 5 0.0 Compliant

FEDERAL AGENCIES
Max % (MV) 100.0 3.5 Compliant
Max % Issuer (MV; Agencies & Agency CMOs) 25.0 11.5 Compliant Max Callables (MV) 20.0 0.0 Compliant
Max Maturity (Years) 5 1 Compliant

LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF)
Max Concentration (MV) 75.0 0.0 Compliant

MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUNDS
Max % (MV) 20.0 1.0 Compliant
Min Rating (AAA by 2) 0.0 0.0 Compliant

MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES (NON-AGENCY)
Max % (MV) 20.0 0.0 Compliant
Max % Issuer (MV) 5.0 0.0 Compliant
Max Maturity (Years) 5.0 0.0 Compliant
Min Rating (AA- by 1) 0.0 0.0 Compliant

MUNICIPAL SECURITIES (CA, LOCAL AGENCY)
Max % (MV) 30.0 0.9 Compliant
Max % Issuer (MV) 5.0 0.9 Compliant
Max Maturity (Years) 5 3 Compliant
Min Rating (A- by 1) 0.0 0.0 Compliant

MUNICIPAL SECURITIES (CA, OTHER STATES)
17 111
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
111 of 2882

STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Rules Name Limit Actual Compliance
Status Notes
Max % (MV) 30.0 0.0 Compliant
Max % Issuer (MV) 5.0 0.0 Compliant
Max Maturity (Years) 5 0.0 Compliant
Min Rating (A- by 1) 0.0 0.0 Compliant

NEGOTIABLE CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT (NCD)
Max % (MV) 30.0 0.0 Compliant
Max % Issuer (MV) 5.0 0.0 Compliant
Max Maturity (Years) 5 0.0 Compliant
Min Rating (A-1 by 1 or A- by 1 if > FDIC Limit) 0.0 0.0 Compliant

REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS
Max % (MV) 10.0 0.0 Compliant
Max % Issuer (MV) 5.0 0.0 Compliant
Max Maturity (Years) 1.0 0.0 Compliant

SUPRANATIONAL OBLIGATIONS
Max % (MV) 30.0 2.9 Compliant
Max % Issuer (MV) 10.0 1.7 Compliant
Max Maturity (Years) 5 4 Compliant
Min Rating (AA- by 1) 0.0 0.0 Compliant
U.S. TREASURIES
Max % (MV) 100.0 45.0 Compliant
Max Maturity (Years) 5 4 Compliant
18 112
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
112 of 2882

PORTFOLIO SUMMARY
Sector Allocation
Performance Review
Total Rate of Return** 1M 3M YTD 1YR 2YRS 3YRS 5YRS 10YRS Since Inception (02/01/19)
City of Cupertino 0.82% 1.26% 1.06% 5.57% 5.58% 5.31% 1.99% -- 2.50% Benchmark Return 0.79% 1.15% 0.95% 5.20% 5.05% 4.91% 1.65% -- 2.24% City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Portfolio Characteristics Account Summary
Maturity Distribution
Top Issuers
Credit Quality*
Average Modified Duration 2.61
Average Coupon 3.74%
Average Purchase YTM 4.03%
Average Market YTM 3.65%
Average Credit Quality* AA+
Average Final Maturity 3.03
Average Life 2.84
End Values as
of 01/31/2026
End Values as
of 02/28/2026
Market Value 206,174,722.48 207,990,852.81
Accrued Interest 1,600,582.56 1,474,068.58
Total Market Value 207,775,305.04 209,464,921.39
Income Earned 438,034.24 520,350.40
Cont/WD 0.00 0.00
Par 206,274,386.28 207,146,288.30
Book Value 204,717,752.76 205,526,481.72
Cost Value 204,173,834.30 204,980,764.26
United States 44.96%
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 11.48%
Farm Credit System 2.54%
International Bank for Recon and Dev 1.69%
Morgan Stanley 1.66%
Guardian Life Global Funding 1.31%
The Home Depot, Inc. 1.27%
Toyota Motor Corporation 1.24%
*The average credit quality is a weighted average calculation of the highest of S&P, Moody’s and Fitch. **Periods over 1 year are annualized.

Benchmark: ICE BofA 1-5 Year Unsubordinated US Treasury & Agency Index 19 113
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
113 of 2882

ISSUERS
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Issuer Investment Type % Portfolio
United States US Treasury 44.96%
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Agency CMBS 11.48%
Farm Credit System Agency 2.54%
International Bank for Recon and Dev Supras 1.69%
Morgan Stanley Corporate 1.66%
Guardian Life Global Funding Corporate 1.31%
The Home Depot, Inc. Corporate 1.27%
Toyota Motor Corporation Corporate 1.24%
Inter-American Development Bank Supras 1.18%
Meta Platforms, Inc. Corporate 1.17%
New York Life Insurance Company Corporate 1.17%
Royal Bank of Canada Corporate 0.99%
Northwestern Mutual Global Funding Corporate 0.98%
Wells Fargo & Company Money Mkt Fd 0.95%
UnitedHealth Group Incorporated Corporate 0.93%
Federal Home Loan Banks Agency 0.91%
Simon Property Group, Inc. Corporate 0.91%
PACCAR Inc Corporate 0.90%
Chubb Limited Corporate 0.86%
State of California Muni Bonds 0.86%
American Honda Finance Corporation Corporate 0.85%
Pricoa Global Funding I Corporate 0.85%
Chase Issuance Trust ABS 0.82%
Bank of America Credit Card Trust ABS 0.80%
Mercedes-Benz Auto Lease Trust ABS 0.78%
Berkshire Hathaway Inc. Corporate 0.77%
PepsiCo, Inc. Corporate 0.74%
Citigroup Inc ABS 0.73%
Prologis, Inc. Corporate 0.73%
Alphabet Inc. Corporate 0.73%
20 114
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
114 of 2882

ISSUERS
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Issuer Investment Type % Portfolio
Bank of America Corporation Corporate 0.73%
The Progressive Corporation Corporate 0.72%
JPMorgan Chase & Co. Corporate 0.72%
Realty Income Corporation Corporate 0.70%
American Express Credit Master Trust ABS 0.69%
Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc. Corporate 0.69%
WF Card Issuance Trust ABS 0.67%
Visa Inc. Corporate 0.65%
Met Tower Global Funding Corporate 0.63%
Caterpillar Inc. Corporate 0.59%
Cargill, Incorporated Corporate 0.53%
Hyundai Auto Lease Sec Trust ABS 0.52%
BMW Vehicle Lease Trust ABS 0.51%
National Rural Utilities Cooperative Corporate 0.50%
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. Corporate 0.49%
Deere & Company Corporate 0.49%
Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Corporate 0.49%
Pacific Mutual Holding Company Corporate 0.49%
Mastercard Incorporated Corporate 0.46%
Honda Auto Receivables Owner Trust ABS 0.46%
The Charles Schwab Corporation Corporate 0.46%
GM Financial Securitized Term ABS 0.45%
Toyota Auto Receivables Owner Trust ABS 0.33%
Mercedes-Benz Auto Receivables Trust ABS 0.31%
John Deere Owner Trust ABS 0.29%
BMW Vehicle Owner Trust ABS 0.29%
Cash Cash 0.19%
Walmart Inc. Corporate 0.17%
WC MMF Sweep Money Mkt Fd 0.03%
TOTAL 100.00%
21 115
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
115 of 2882

HISTORICAL AVERAGE PURCHASE YIELD
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Purchase Yield as of 02/28/26 = 4.03%
22 116
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
116 of 2882

PORTFOLIO HOLDINGS
23 117
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
117 of 2882

HOLDINGS REPORT
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/
Units
Purchase
Date
Purchase
Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt
Price
Mkt
YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.

Gain/Loss
Moody's/
S&P/
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
ABS
47800AAC4 JDOT 2022-B A3 3.74 02/16/2027 20,575.83 07/12/2022

3.77%
20,573.87
20,575.43

99.99 4.03%
20,573.90

34.20 0.01%
(1.53)
Aaa/NA
AAA

0.97 0.04
44934FAD7 HALST 2024-B A3 5.41 05/17/2027 438,981.82 05/14/2024

5.41%
438,969.61
438,976.87
100.38

3.54%
440,662.68
1,055.51

0.21%
1,685.81
NA/AAA
AAA

1.21 0.20
47800BAC2 JDOT 2022-C A3 5.09 06/15/2027 144,489.54 10/12/2022

5.15%
144,478.33
144,486.47
100.17

3.80%
144,737.77
326.87

0.07%
251.30
Aaa/NA
AAA

1.29 0.12
89231FAD2 TAOT 2023-C A3 5.16 04/17/2028 679,047.61 11/21/2023

5.65%
676,288.98
677,711.24
100.62

3.80%
683,279.43
1,557.28

0.33%
5,568.20
NA/AAA
AAA

2.13 0.44
438123AC5 HAROT 2023-4 A3 5.67
06/21/2028 485,004.22 --5.64%
486,204.78
485,487.59
101.06

3.84%
490,161.27
763.88

0.24%
4,673.68
Aaa/NA
AAA

2.31 0.53
05594HAD5 BMWLT 2025-2 A3 3.97
09/25/2028 1,050,000.00 10/08/20254.32%
1,049,997.06
1,049,997.43
100.37

3.72%
1,053,889.20
694.75

0.51%
3,891.77
NA/AAA
AAA

2.57 1.31
58769FAC9 MBART 2023-2 A3 5.95
11/15/2028 627,133.74 11/29/20233.88%
640,411.33
632,906.61
101.23

3.82%
634,848.74
1,658.42

0.31%
1,942.13
NA/AAA
AAA

2.71 0.56
47800RAD5 JDOT 2024 A3 4.96 11/15/2028 429,889.45 03/25/2024

5.13%
429,687.94
429,771.69
100.83

3.66%
433,474.73
947.67

0.21%
3,703.04
Aaa/NA
AAA

2.71 0.62
05522RDH8 BACCT 2023-2 A 4.98 11/16/2026 850,000.00 01/24/2024

4.58%
858,798.83
852,231.76
100.85

3.78%
857,252.20
1,881.33

0.41%
5,020.44
Aaa/NA
AAA

0.71 0.68
437930AC4 HAROT 2024-2 A3 5.27
11/20/2028 453,307.78 05/14/20245.27%
453,252.71
453,274.45
101.03

3.82%
457,975.49
862.67

0.22%
4,701.04
NA/AAA
AAA

2.73 0.68
448970AD5 HALST 2026-A A3 3.97
12/15/2028 635,000.00 01/12/20263.98%
634,906.91
634,910.34
100.42

3.76%
637,698.12
1,120.42

0.31%
2,787.78
NA/AAA
AAA

2.80 1.76
36268GAD7 GMCAR 2024-1 A3 4.85
12/18/2028 929,154.91 --4.97%
927,681.50
928,266.79
100.62

3.82%
934,953.77
1,877.67

0.45%
6,686.97
Aaa/NA
AAA

2.80 0.58
161571HV9 CHAIT 241 A 4.6 01/16/2029 1,690,000.00 01/24/2024

4.61%
1,689,742.61
1,689,850.56
100.78

3.71%
1,703,195.52
3,455.11

0.82%
13,344.96
NA/AAA
AAA

2.88 0.84
096919AD7 BMWOT 2024-A A3 5.18
02/26/2029 592,121.75 06/04/20245.18%
592,031.80
592,064.62
100.89

3.92%
597,383.34
511.20

0.29%
5,318.72
Aaa/AAA
NA

3.00 0.68
58770XAD5 MBALT 2025-B A3 3.88
04/16/2029 1,045,000.00 10/16/20254.57%
1,044,828.52
1,044,846.05
100.30

3.74%
1,048,118.28
1,802.04

0.50%
3,272.23
NA/AAA
AAA

3.13 1.72
05522RDJ4 BACCT 2024-1 A 4.93 05/15/2029 785,000.00 06/06/2024

4.93%
784,955.96
784,971.41
101.48

3.70%
796,604.66
1,720.02

0.38%
11,633.25
Aaa/AAA
NA

3.21 1.15
24 118
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
118 of 2882

HOLDINGS REPORT
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/
Units
Purchase
Date
Purchase
Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt
Price
Mkt
YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.

Gain/Loss
Moody's/
S&P/
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
58770YAD3 MBALT 2026-A A3 3.93
01/15/2030 570,000.00 01/13/20263.97%
569,886.97
569,890.00
100.39

3.76%
572,244.09
995.60

0.28%
2,354.09
Aaa/NA
AAA

3.88 1.96
02582JKP4 AMXCA 2025-2 A 4.28 04/15/2030 1,420,000.00 05/06/2025

4.28%
1,419,974.30
1,419,978.47
101.39

3.63%
1,439,718.12
2,701.16

0.69%
19,739.65
NA/AAA
AAA

4.13 1.99
92970QAJ4 WFCIT 2025-1 A 4.34 05/15/2030 1,365,000.00 06/03/2025

4.33%
1,364,977.34
1,364,980.66
101.49

3.66%
1,385,380.82
2,632.93

0.67%
20,400.15
NA/AAA
AAA

4.21 2.06
17305EHA6 CCCIT 2025-A1 A1 4.3 06/21/2030 1,500,000.00 10/09/2025

3.90%
1,515,000.00
1,512,837.56
101.46

3.63%
1,521,948.00
12,541.67

0.73%
9,110.44
Aaa/AAA
NA

4.31 2.16
15,742,649.36 100.92 15,854,100.12 7.62% 3.05
Total ABS 15,709,706.65 4.58% 15,728,016.00 3.73% 39,140.40 126,084.11 1.26 AGENCY
3130B0TY5 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS 4.75
04/09/2027 1,875,000.00 04/10/20244.85%
1,870,050.00
1,873,170.36
101.31

3.53%
1,899,481.88
35,130.21

0.91%
26,311.52
Aa1/AA+
AA+

1.11 1.05
3133ERDS7 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS
FUNDING CORP 4.75 05/06/2027 2,400,000.00 06/20/20244.55% 2,412,552.00
2,405,157.21
101.44

3.49%
2,434,562.40
36,416.67

1.17%
29,405.19
Aa1/AA+
AA+

1.18 1.12
3133EPC60 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS
FUNDING CORP 4.625 11/15/2027 2,800,000.00 11/09/20234.73% 2,789,612.00
2,795,563.24
101.89

3.47%
2,852,917.20
38,130.56

1.37%
57,353.96
Aa1/AA+
AA+

1.71 1.61
7,072,214.00 101.58 7,186,961.48 3.46% 1.37
Total Agency 7,075,000.00 4.70% 7,073,890.80 3.49% 109,677.43 113,070.67 1.30

AGENCY CMBS
3137BSP72 FHMS K-058 A2 2.653 08/25/2026 650,000.00 11/12/2021

1.36%
687,451.17
653,335.29

99.33 3.82%
645,634.60
1,437.04

0.31%
(7,700.69)
Aa1/AA+
AAA

0.49 0.43
3137FKUP9 FHMS K-087 A2 3.771 12/25/2028 1,938,959.12 07/01/2024

4.86%
1,854,962.81
1,886,474.47
100.21

3.62%
1,943,032.87
6,093.18

0.93%
56,558.40
Aa1/AAA
AA+

2.82 2.51
3137FL6P4 FHMS K-089 A2 3.563 01/25/2029 1,288,000.00 07/03/2024

4.70%
1,228,178.44
1,250,104.49

99.69 3.62%
1,283,971.14
3,824.29

0.62%
33,866.65
Aa1/AA+
AA+

2.91 2.67
3137H5YC5 FHMS K-748 A2 2.26 01/25/2029 2,000,000.00 07/03/2024

4.74%
1,801,718.75
1,874,393.61

96.10 3.70%
1,922,076.00
3,766.67

0.92%
47,682.39
Aa1/AA+
AAA

2.91 2.67
3137FKZZ2 FHMS K-088 A2 3.69 01/25/2029 2,550,000.00 07/17/2024

4.50%
2,465,830.08
2,496,253.57

99.99 3.63%
2,549,852.10
7,841.25

1.23%
53,598.53
Aaa/AA+
AA+

2.91 2.63
25 119
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
119 of 2882

HOLDINGS REPORT
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/
Units
Purchase
Date
Purchase
Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt
Price
Mkt
YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.

Gain/Loss
Moody's/
S&P/
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
3137FLN91 FHMS K-091 A2 3.505 03/25/2029 2,500,000.00 03/20/2025

4.25%
2,431,738.28
2,447,936.78

99.50 3.63%
2,487,462.50
7,302.08

1.20%
39,525.72
Aa1/AAA
AA+

3.07 2.76
3137FMCR1 FHMS K-093 A2 2.982 05/25/2029 1,967,475.38 09/19/2024

3.82%
1,898,152.61
1,919,733.45

98.06 3.62%
1,929,225.69
4,889.18

0.93%
9,492.24
Aa1/AA+
AAA

3.24 2.84
3137FNAE0 FHMS K-095 A2 2.785 06/25/2029 2,200,000.00 07/17/2024

4.47%
2,039,382.82
2,092,741.31

97.34 3.64%
2,141,416.20
5,105.83

1.03%
48,674.89
Aa1/AA+
AAA

3.32 3.01
3137FPHK4 FHMS K-098 A2 2.425 08/25/2029 1,600,000.00 09/03/2024

4.00%
1,488,375.00
1,522,111.94

96.04 3.65%
1,536,660.80
3,233.33

0.74%
14,548.86
Aa1/AA+
AAA

3.49 3.19
3137FPJG1 FHMS K-099 A2 2.595 09/25/2029 1,500,000.00 06/05/2025

4.21%
1,407,011.72
1,422,911.27

96.45 3.66%
1,446,811.50
3,243.75

0.70%
23,900.23
Aa1/AA+
AAA

3.57 3.25
3137FRUT6 FHMS K-106 A2 2.069 01/25/2030 2,000,000.00 06/06/2025

4.37%
1,810,078.13
1,840,077.80

94.10 3.70%
1,882,020.00
3,448.33

0.90%
41,942.20
Aa1/AA+
AAA

3.91 3.65
3137FTZQ3 FHMS K-110 A2 1.477 04/25/2030 1,500,000.00 09/03/2025

3.96%
1,348,652.34
1,364,459.36

91.71 3.72%
1,375,662.00
1,846.25

0.66%
11,202.64
Aa1/AA+
AAA

4.15 3.80
3137FWG79 FHMS K-115 A2 1.383 06/25/2030 2,000,000.00 12/10/2025

3.99%
1,787,343.75
1,797,265.10

90.74 3.74%
1,814,756.00
2,305.00

0.87%
17,490.90
Aa1/AA+
AAA

4.32 4.07
3137FXZ35 FHMS K-127 A2 2.108 01/25/2031 1,000,000.00 02/03/2026

4.11%
910,937.50
912,081.88

92.56 3.78%
925,588.00
1,756.67

0.45%
13,506.12
Aa1/AA+
AAA

4.91 4.53
23,159,813.40 96.82 23,884,169.40 11.48% 3.33
Total Agency CMBS 24,694,434.50 4.24% 23,479,880.31 3.67% 56,092.85 404,289.09 3.04 CASH
CCYUSD Receivable 396,692.96 -- 396,692.96
396,692.96

1.00 396,692.96

0.00 0.19%

0.00 Aaa/AAA
AAA

0.00 0.00
396,692.96 1.00 396,692.96 0.19% 0.00
Total Cash 396,692.96 396,692.96 0.00 0.00 0.00

CORPORATE
931142ER0 WALMART INC 1.05 09/17/2026 350,000.00 09/08/2021

1.09%
349,338.50
349,927.55

98.55 3.78%
344,926.75
1,674.17

0.17%
(5,000.80)
Aa2/AA
AA

0.55 0.53
808513BY0 CHARLES SCHWAB CORP 2.45
03/03/2027 960,000.00 03/01/20222.46%
959,729.90
959,941.68

98.73 3.75%
947,788.80
11,629.33

0.46%
(12,152.88)
A2/AA1.01

0.97 26
120
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
120 of 2882

HOLDINGS REPORT
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/
Units
Purchase
Date
Purchase
Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt
Price
Mkt
YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.

Gain/Loss
Moody's/
S&P/
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
084664CZ2 BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY FINANCE
CORP 2.3 03/15/2027 1,615,000.00 03/07/20222.30%
1,614,693.15
1,614,936.31

98.63 3.66%
1,592,814.75
17,127.97

0.77%
(22,121.57)
Aa2/AA
A+

1.04 1.00
57636QAW4 MASTERCARD INC 4.875
03/09/2028 945,000.00 03/06/20234.90%
944,083.35
944,629.23
102.19

3.74%
965,682.27
22,010.63

0.46%
21,053.04
Aa3/A+
NA

2.03 1.80
61690U8E3 MORGAN STANLEY BANK NA

4.968 07/14/2028 1,950,000.00 07/17/20244.97%
1,950,000.00
1,950,000.00
101.28

4.25%
1,974,975.60
12,647.70

0.95%
24,975.60
Aa3/A+
AA2.381.30
69371RU20 PACCAR FINANCIAL CORP 4.0
11/07/2028 1,865,000.00 11/05/20254.02%
1,863,955.60
1,864,064.23
100.73

3.71%
1,878,616.37
23,623.33

0.90%
14,552.13
A1/A+
NA

2.69 2.49
58989V2M5 MET TOWER GLOBAL FUNDING

4.0 01/14/2029 1,310,000.00 01/07/20264.05%
1,308,310.10
1,308,381.03
100.15

3.94%
1,311,941.42
6,841.11

0.63%
3,560.39
Aa3/AAAA2.88

2.67 74340XBL4 PROLOGIS LP 4.375 02/01/2029 1,500,000.00 07/18/2024

4.68%
1,481,235.00
1,487,912.53
101.29

3.90%
1,519,387.50
5,468.75

0.73%
31,474.97
A2/A
NA

2.93 2.49
78016HZV5 ROYAL BANK OF CANADA 4.95
02/01/2029 2,000,000.00 10/31/20244.69%
2,019,920.00
2,013,699.01
103.18

3.79%
2,063,546.00
8,250.00

0.99%
49,846.99
A1/A
AA2.932.69
743315AV5 PROGRESSIVE CORP 4.0
03/01/2029 1,500,000.00 07/16/20244.72%
1,455,495.00
1,471,103.39
100.44

3.84%
1,506,672.00
30,000.00

0.72%
35,568.61
A2/A
A

3.00 2.58
64952WFG3 NEW YORK LIFE GLOBAL FUNDING

5.0 06/06/2029 1,000,000.00 07/01/20245.12%
994,880.00
996,606.58
103.34

3.90%
1,033,401.00
11,805.56

0.50%
36,794.42
Aa1/AA+
AAA

3.27 2.96
437076BY7 HOME DEPOT INC 2.95
06/15/2029 1,663,000.00 09/17/20243.93%
1,593,203.89
1,614,533.84

97.50 3.77%
1,621,398.39
10,356.79

0.78%
6,864.55
A2/A
A

3.29 3.08
437076DC3 HOME DEPOT INC 4.75
06/25/2029 1,000,000.00 07/01/20244.93%
992,260.00
994,842.84
102.98

3.78%
1,029,827.00
8,708.33

0.50%
34,984.16
A2/A
A

3.32 2.96
756109CB8 REALTY INCOME CORP 4.0
07/15/2029 1,463,000.00 08/08/20244.69%
1,419,212.41
1,433,046.47
100.09

3.97%
1,464,291.83
7,477.56

0.70%
31,245.36
A3/ANA3.38

2.89 713448FX1 PEPSICO INC 4.5 07/17/2029 1,500,000.00 07/15/2024

4.53%
1,497,675.00
1,498,428.78
102.34

3.75%
1,535,142.00
8,250.00

0.74%
36,713.22
A1/A+
NA

3.38 3.03
46647PAV8 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 4.203
07/23/2029 1,500,000.00 09/17/20244.27%
1,496,610.00
1,497,887.29
100.43

4.35%
1,506,493.50
6,654.75

0.72%
8,606.21
A1/A
AA3.402.25
06051GHM4 BANK OF AMERICA CORP 4.271
07/23/2029 1,500,000.00 09/17/20244.29%
1,498,710.00
1,499,196.05
100.57

4.37%
1,508,484.00
6,762.42

0.73%
9,287.95
A1/AAA3.40

2.24 30303M8S4 META PLATFORMS INC 4.3
08/15/2029 912,000.00 08/12/20244.33%
910,584.09
911,020.65
101.61

3.80%
926,688.67
1,742.93

0.45%
15,668.02
Aa3/AANA3.46

3.11 171239AL0 CHUBB INA HOLDINGS LLC 4.65
08/15/2029 1,750,000.00 --4.44%
1,765,746.34
1,761,069.71
102.64

3.83%
1,796,229.75
3,616.67

0.86%
35,160.05
A2/A
A

3.46 3.09
27 121
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
121 of 2882

HOLDINGS REPORT
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/
Units
Purchase
Date
Purchase
Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt
Price
Mkt
YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.

Gain/Loss
Moody's/
S&P/
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
91324PDS8 UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 2.875
08/15/2029 2,000,000.00 09/17/20243.94%
1,906,080.00
1,933,805.27

96.62 3.93%
1,932,470.00
2,555.56

0.93%
(1,335.27)
A2/A+
A

3.46 3.24
02665WFQ9 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE
CORP 4.4 09/05/2029 1,750,000.00 10/02/20244.29%
1,758,102.50
1,755,786.21
101.41

3.97%
1,774,659.25
37,644.44

0.85%
18,873.04
A3/ANA3.52

3.16 40139LBJ1 GUARDIAN LIFE GLOBAL FUNDING

4.179 09/26/2029 1,205,000.00 09/23/20244.18%
1,205,000.00
1,205,000.00
100.49

4.03%
1,210,932.22
21,681.46

0.58%
5,932.22
Aa1/AA+
NA

3.57 3.23
61748UAK8 MORGAN STANLEY 4.133
10/18/2029 1,470,000.00 10/17/20254.25%
1,470,184.60
1,470,162.62
100.16

4.21%
1,472,278.50
21,770.58

0.71%
2,115.88
A1/AA+3.64

2.43 38141GD27 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC

4.153 10/21/2029 1,025,000.00 10/14/20254.37%
1,025,000.00
1,025,000.00
100.03

4.25%
1,025,320.83
15,371.87

0.49%
320.83
A2/BBB+
A

3.64 2.44
14913UAU4 CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES
CORP 4.7 11/15/2029 1,200,000.00 11/14/20244.74%
1,198,092.00
1,198,584.15
102.89

3.85%
1,234,656.00
16,606.67

0.59%
36,071.85
A2/A
A+

3.71 3.34
64952WFK4 NEW YORK LIFE GLOBAL FUNDING

4.6 12/05/2029 1,365,000.00 12/02/20244.61%
1,364,221.95
1,364,414.12
102.18

3.97%
1,394,762.46
14,999.83

0.67%
30,348.34
Aa1/AA+
AAA

3.77 3.39
89236TNA9 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP

4.95 01/09/2030 1,445,000.00 01/06/20255.00%
1,441,907.70
1,442,612.19
103.67

3.91%
1,498,069.07
10,331.75

0.72%
55,456.88
A1/A+
A+

3.86 3.47
63743HFX5

NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES
COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORP 4.95
02/07/2030
1,000,000.00
02/05/2025

4.88%
1,002,873.61
1,002,254.06
103.60

3.95%
1,036,042.00
3,300.00

0.50%
33,787.94
A2/NA
A

3.94 3.48
571748CA8 MARSH & MCLENNAN
COMPANIES INC 4.65 03/15/2030 1,400,000.00 03/11/20254.69% 1,397,340.00
1,397,848.96
101.99

4.11%
1,427,928.60
30,018.33

0.69%
30,079.64
A3/AA4.04

3.51 57629TBX4 MASSMUTUAL GLOBAL FUNDING
II 4.55 05/07/2030 1,000,000.00 05/01/20254.58%
998,670.00
998,887.05
101.74

4.09%
1,017,396.00
14,408.33

0.49%
18,508.95
Aa3/AA+
AA+

4.19 3.73
66815L2W8 NORTHWESTERNMUTUAL
GLOBAL FUNDING 4.6 06/03/2030 1,000,000.00 06/12/20254.51% 1,004,040.00
1,003,459.36
101.86

4.12%
1,018,647.00
11,244.44

0.49%
15,187.64
Aa1/AA+
AAA

4.26 3.80
828807DK0 SIMON PROPERTY GROUP LP 2.65
07/15/2030 2,000,000.00 08/19/20254.32%
1,853,380.00
1,869,188.75

94.50 4.04%
1,889,958.00
6,772.22

0.91%
20,769.25
A3/A
NA

4.38 4.05
40139LBN2 GUARDIAN LIFE GLOBAL FUNDING

4.327 10/06/2030 1,500,000.00 09/30/20254.33%
1,500,000.00
1,500,000.00
100.74

4.15%
1,511,098.50
26,142.29

0.73%
11,098.50
Aa1/AA+
NA

4.60 4.06
24422EYF0 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 4.375
10/15/2030 1,000,000.00 11/04/20254.22%
1,006,920.00
1,006,475.28
101.76

3.95%
1,017,626.00
16,527.78

0.49%
11,150.72
A1/A
A+

4.63 4.09
141781CF9 CARGILL INC 4.125 10/23/2030 1,100,000.00 10/20/2025

4.14%
1,099,171.70
1,099,230.22
100.36

4.04%
1,103,996.30
16,133.33

0.53%
4,766.08
A2/A
NA

4.65 4.06
28 122
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
122 of 2882

HOLDINGS REPORT
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/
Units
Purchase
Date
Purchase
Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt
Price
Mkt
YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.

Gain/Loss
Moody's/
S&P/
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
30303MAB8 META PLATFORMS INC 4.2
11/15/2030 1,500,000.00 11/13/20254.16%
1,502,895.00
1,502,727.08
100.88

3.99%
1,513,192.50
20,650.00

0.73%
10,465.42
Aa3/AANA4.71

4.11 74153WCZ0 PRICOA GLOBAL FUNDING I 4.35
11/25/2030 1,750,000.00 12/08/20254.36%
1,749,440.00
1,749,465.34
101.05

4.10%
1,768,448.50
20,300.00

0.85%
18,983.16
Aa3/NA
AA4.744.19
89236TPH2 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP 4.2
01/10/2031 1,080,000.00 01/07/20264.21%
1,079,665.20
1,079,674.01
100.75

4.03%
1,088,063.28
6,174.00

0.52%
8,389.27
A1/A+
A+

4.87 4.33
66815L2Z1 NORTHWESTERNMUTUAL
GLOBAL FUNDING 4.3 01/13/2031 1,020,000.00 01/06/20264.30% 1,019,908.20
1,019,910.56
100.54

4.17%
1,025,538.60
5,848.00

0.49%
5,628.04
Aa1/AA+
AAA

4.87 4.33
6944PL3M9 PACIFIC LIFE GLOBAL FUNDING II

4.375 02/03/2031 1,000,000.00 01/29/20264.34%
1,001,380.00
1,001,360.35
101.18

4.11%
1,011,841.00
3,402.78

0.49%
10,480.65
Aa3/AAAA4.93

4.38 92826CAZ5 VISA INC 4.1 02/12/2031 1,345,000.00 02/03/2026

4.13%
1,343,197.70
1,343,214.48
101.16

3.84%
1,360,593.93
2,910.43

0.65%
17,379.45
Aa3/AANA4.96

4.37 02079KBK2 ALPHABET INC 4.1 02/15/2031 1,500,000.00 02/12/2026

4.10%
1,500,087.78
1,500,087.16
100.66

3.95%
1,509,874.50
3,075.00

0.73%
9,787.34
Aa2/AA+
NA

4.96 4.37
Total Corporate 56,938,000.00 4.32%
56,543,200.27
56,640,374.37
100.80

3.97%
57,371,700.62
532,517.10

27.58%
731,326.25

3.59 3.10

MONEY MARKET
FUND
992995944 WC MMF SWEEP 52,938.56 --

1.80%
52,938.56
52,938.56

1.00 1.80%
52,938.56

0.00 0.03%

0.00 NA/NA
NA

0.00 0.00
VP4520004 WF ADV 100% TREAS MM FD-SVC
CL #008 1,979,515.63 --3.22%
1,979,515.63
1,979,515.63

1.00 3.22%
1,979,515.63

0.00 0.95%

0.00 Aaa/AAAm
NA

0.00 0.00
Total Money Market
Fund 2,032,454.19 3.18%
2,032,454.19
2,032,454.19

1.00 3.18%
2,032,454.19

0.00 0.98%

0.00 0.00

0.00 MUNICIPAL BONDS
13063EGT7 CALIFORNIA STATE 4.5 08/01/2029 1,740,000.00 10/30/2024

4.38%
1,749,169.80
1,746,620.28
102.97

3.57%
1,791,691.92
6,525.00

0.86%
45,071.64
Aa2/AAAA3.42

3.14 Total Municipal
Bonds 1,740,000.00 4.38%
1,749,169.80
1,746,620.28
102.97

3.57%
1,791,691.92
6,525.00

0.86%
45,071.64

3.42 3.14

SUPRANATIONAL
29 123
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
123 of 2882

HOLDINGS REPORT
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/
Units
Purchase
Date
Purchase
Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt
Price
Mkt
YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.

Gain/Loss
Moody's/
S&P/
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
4581X0DV7 INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT
BANK 0.875 04/20/2026 2,460,000.00 04/13/20210.97%
2,448,733.20
2,459,691.49

99.60 3.86%
2,450,216.58
7,832.71

1.18%
(9,474.91)
Aaa/AAA
NA

0.14 0.13
459058LN1

INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR

RECONSTRUCTION AND
DEVELOPM 3.875 10/16/2029
1,750,000.00
12/12/2024

4.25%
1,721,510.00
1,728,648.61
101.34

3.48%
1,773,366.00
25,427.50

0.85%
44,717.39
Aaa/AAA
NA

3.63 3.31
459058LR2

INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR

RECONSTRUCTION AND
DEVELOPM 4.125 03/20/2030
1,700,000.00
03/14/2025

4.20%
1,694,220.00
1,695,315.22
102.30

3.51%
1,739,171.40
31,361.46

0.84%
43,856.18
Aaa/AAA
NA

4.05 3.64
Total Supranational 5,910,000.00 2.89%
5,864,463.20
5,883,655.33
100.91

3.64%
5,962,753.98
64,621.67

2.87%
79,098.65

2.32 2.10

US TREASURY
91282CBW0 UNITED STATES TREASURY 0.75
04/30/2026 2,500,000.00 05/27/20210.80%
2,493,652.34
2,499,788.18

99.51 3.75%
2,487,812.50
6,267.27

1.20%
(11,975.68)
Aa1/AA+
AA+

0.17 0.16
912797UB1 UNITED STATES TREASURY
06/23/2026 2,000,000.00 02/25/20263.68%
1,976,657.85
1,977,256.37

98.87 3.68%
1,977,494.00

0.00 0.95%
237.63
P-1/A-1+
F1+

0.31 0.31
91282CCZ2 UNITED STATES TREASURY 0.875
09/30/2026 1,400,000.00 10/18/20211.19%
1,379,054.68
1,397,531.07

98.42 3.65%
1,377,933.20
5,115.38

0.66%
(19,597.87)
Aa1/AA+
AA+

0.59 0.57
91282CDG3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 1.125
10/31/2026 1,400,000.00 11/15/20211.25%
1,391,468.75
1,398,849.30

98.35 3.66%
1,376,942.00
5,264.50

0.66%
(21,907.30)
Aa1/AA+
AA+

0.67 0.65
91282CJP7 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.375
12/15/2026 2,500,000.00 12/28/20234.01%
2,525,097.66
2,506,703.53
100.63

3.56%
2,515,645.00
22,836.54

1.21%
8,941.47
Aa1/AA+
AA+

0.79 0.76
91282CKJ9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.5
04/15/2027 2,300,000.00 04/17/20244.77%
2,283,109.38
2,293,658.28
101.09

3.50%
2,324,975.70
38,954.67

1.12%
31,317.42
Aa1/AA+
AA+

1.13 1.07
91282CKR1 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.5
05/15/2027 3,200,000.00 05/08/20244.65%
3,186,500.00
3,194,575.34
101.18

3.49%
3,237,625.60
42,165.75

1.56%
43,050.26
Aa1/AA+
AA+

1.21 1.15
91282CEW7 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.25
06/30/2027 3,250,000.00 --3.18%
3,260,312.50
3,252,674.75

99.73 3.46%
3,241,241.25
17,506.91

1.56%
(11,433.50)
Aa1/AA+
AA+

1.33 1.29
91282CFB2 UNITED STATES TREASURY 2.75
07/31/2027 400,000.00 08/22/20223.12%
393,218.75
398,055.51

99.04 3.45%
396,156.40
881.22

0.19%
(1,899.11)
Aa1/AA+
AA+

1.42 1.37
91282CFH9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.125
08/31/2027 4,500,000.00 --3.28%
4,468,902.34
4,490,617.63

99.54 3.44%
4,479,435.00
382.13

2.15%
(11,182.63)
Aa1/AA+
AA+

1.50 1.45
91282CFM8 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.125
09/30/2027 3,450,000.00 --4.31%
3,421,152.34
3,440,719.85
101.06

3.43%
3,486,656.25
59,427.20

1.68%
45,936.40
Aa1/AA+
AA+

1.59 1.49
30 124
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
124 of 2882

HOLDINGS REPORT
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/
Units
Purchase
Date
Purchase
Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt
Price
Mkt
YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.

Gain/Loss
Moody's/
S&P/
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
91282CFZ9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.875
11/30/2027 850,000.00 12/05/20223.81%
852,656.25
850,932.61
100.77

3.41%
856,573.90
8,234.38

0.41%
5,641.29
Aa1/AA+
AA+

1.75 1.66
91282CGC9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.875
12/31/2027 2,750,000.00 --3.67%
2,775,107.42
2,759,355.97
100.82

3.40%
2,772,665.50
17,662.29

1.33%
13,309.53
Aa1/AA+
AA+

1.84 1.75
91282CGH8 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.5
01/31/2028 3,000,000.00 02/07/20233.81%
2,957,929.69
2,983,778.17
100.19

3.39%
3,005,742.00
8,411.60

1.45%
21,963.83
Aa1/AA+
AA+

1.92 1.84
91282CGP0 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.0
02/29/2028 3,700,000.00 --4.01%
3,699,113.28
3,699,698.71
101.15

3.40%
3,742,635.10
402.17

1.80%
42,936.39
Aa1/AA+
AA+

2.00 1.90
91282CNY3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.375
09/15/2028 5,000,000.00 10/28/20253.50%
4,982,812.50
4,984,822.07

99.96 3.39%
4,998,240.00
77,848.76

2.40%
13,417.93
Aa1/AA+
AA+

2.55 2.37
91282CKG5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.125
03/31/2029 2,300,000.00 04/17/20244.62%
2,249,867.19
2,268,777.91
102.10

3.40%
2,348,336.80
39,618.13

1.13%
79,558.89
Aa1/AA+
AA+

3.08 2.83
91282CKX8 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.25
06/30/2029 2,000,000.00 07/01/20244.41%
1,985,546.88
1,990,356.66
102.60

3.42%
2,051,954.00
14,088.40

0.99%
61,597.34
Aa1/AA+
AA+

3.33 3.07
91282CLK5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.625
08/31/2029 3,500,000.00 09/11/20243.45%
3,527,480.47
3,519,386.39
100.63

3.43%
3,521,875.00
344.77

1.69%
2,488.61
Aa1/AA+
AA+

3.50 3.26
91282CLN9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.5
09/30/2029 5,000,000.00 --3.83%
4,925,039.06
4,945,893.35
100.21

3.44%
5,010,740.00
73,076.92

2.41%
64,846.65
Aa1/AA+
AA+

3.59 3.29
91282CLR0 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.125
10/31/2029 3,000,000.00 10/31/20244.17%
2,993,789.06
2,995,439.64
102.33

3.44%
3,069,843.00
41,363.95

1.48%
74,403.36
Aa1/AA+
AA+

3.67 3.34
91282CMD0 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.375
12/31/2029 4,400,000.00 --4.53%
4,369,171.88
4,376,146.66
103.28

3.45%
4,544,201.20
31,906.08

2.18%
168,054.54
Aa1/AA+
AA+

3.84 3.49
91282CMG3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.25
01/31/2030 4,000,000.00 02/07/20254.34%
3,983,906.25
3,987,309.33
102.88

3.46%
4,115,000.00
13,618.78

1.98%
127,690.67
Aa1/AA+
AA+

3.92 3.58
91282CGQ8 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.0
02/28/2030 4,500,000.00 --4.01%
4,496,958.99
4,497,507.34
101.98

3.47%
4,588,947.00
489.13

2.21%
91,439.66
Aa1/AA+
AA+

4.00 3.67
91282CNK3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.875
06/30/2030 5,000,000.00 --3.78%
5,020,507.81
5,019,515.75
101.56

3.48%
5,077,930.00
32,113.26

2.44%
58,414.25
Aa1/AA+
AA+

4.33 3.94
91282CHR5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.0
07/31/2030 5,000,000.00 10/23/20253.59%
5,089,062.50
5,082,514.54
102.06

3.49%
5,103,125.00
16,022.10

2.45%
20,610.46
Aa1/AA+
AA+

4.42 4.01
91282CNX5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.625
08/31/2030 5,000,000.00 --3.66%
4,991,425.79
4,992,305.03
100.52

3.50%
5,025,975.00
492.53

2.42%
33,669.97
Aa1/AA+
AA+

4.50 4.12
91282CPA3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.625
09/30/2030 5,000,000.00 --3.59%
5,008,789.06
5,008,157.67
100.51

3.50%
5,025,585.00
75,686.81

2.42%
17,427.33
Aa1/AA+
AA+

4.59 4.13
31 125
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
125 of 2882

HOLDINGS REPORT
City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/
Units
Purchase
Date
Purchase
Yield
Cost Value
Book Value
Mkt
Price
Mkt
YTM
Market Value
Accrued Int.
% of Port.

Gain/Loss
Moody's/
S&P/
Fitch
Maturity
Duration
91282CPN5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.5
11/30/2030 1,750,000.00 12/15/20253.73%
1,731,816.41
1,732,569.87

99.95 3.51%
1,749,042.75
15,312.50

0.84%
16,472.88
Aa1/AA+
AA+

4.75 4.30
Total US Treasury 92,650,000.00 3.73%
92,420,107.08
92,544,897.47
100.94

3.47%
93,510,328.15
665,494.12

44.96%
965,430.68

2.86 2.63
Total Portfolio 207,146,288.30 4.03%
204,980,764.26
205,526,481.72

99.30 3.65%
207,990,852.81
1,474,068.58
100.00%
2,464,371.10

3.03 2.61
Total Market Value +
Accrued 209,464,921.39
32 126
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
126 of 2882

TRANSACTIONS
33 127
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
127 of 2882

TRANSACTION LEDGER
City of Cupertino | Account #10659|02/01/2026 Through 02/28/2026| Transaction
Type
Settlement
Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/DispYield Amount Interest Pur/Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss

ACQUISITIONS
Purchase 02/06/2026 3137FXZ35 1,000,000.00 FHMS K-127 A2 2.108 01/25/2031 91.094 4.11% (910,937.50) (292.78) (911,230.28) 0.00 Purchase 02/12/2026 92826CAZ5 1,345,000.00 VISA INC 4.1 02/12/2031 99.866 4.13% (1,343,197.70) 0.00 (1,343,197.70) 0.00 Purchase 02/17/2026 02079KBK2 612,000.00 ALPHABET INC 4.1 02/15/2031 99.951 4.11% (611,697.06) (278.80) (611,975.86) 0.00 Purchase 02/17/2026 02079KBK2 888,000.00 ALPHABET INC 4.1 02/15/2031 100.044 4.09% (888,390.72) (404.53) (888,795.25) 0.00 Purchase 02/26/2026 912797UB1 2,000,000.00 UNITED STATES TREASURY 06/23/2026 98.833 3.68% (1,976,657.85) 0.00 (1,976,657.85) 0.00 Total Purchase 5,845,000.00 (5,730,880.83) (976.11) (5,731,856.94) 0.00 TOTAL
ACQUISITIONS 5,845,000.00 (5,730,880.83) (976.11) (5,731,856.94) 0.00

DISPOSITIONS
Sale 02/06/2026 3137FBBX3 (1,000,000.00) FHMS K-068 A2 3.244 08/25/2027 99.094 4.36% 990,937.50 450.56 991,388.06 6,076.89 Sale 02/26/2026 24422EXZ7 (1,430,000.00) JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 4.65 01/07/2028 101.742 4.66% 1,454,910.60 9,050.71 1,463,961.31 25,177.50 Total Sale (2,430,000.00) 2,445,848.10 9,501.27 2,455,349.37 31,254.39 TOTAL
DISPOSITIONS (2,430,000.00) 2,445,848.10 9,501.27 2,455,349.37 31,254.39 34 128
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
128 of 2882

IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES
2026 Chandler Asset Management, Inc, An Independent Registered Investment Adviser.

Information contained herein is confidential. Prices are provided by ICE Data Services Inc (“IDS”), an independent pricing source. In the event IDS does not provide a price or if the price provided is not reflective of fair market value, Chandler will obtain pricing from an alternative approved third party pricing source in accordance with our written valuation policy and procedures. Our valuation procedures are also disclosed in Item 5 of our Form ADV Part 2A.

Performance results are presented gross-of-advisory fees and represent the client’s Total Return. The deduction of advisory fees lowers performance results. These results include the reinvestment of dividends and other earnings. Past performance may not be indicative of future results. Therefore, clients should not assume that future performance of any specific investment or investment strategy will be profitable or equal to past performance levels. All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss. Economic factors, market conditions or changes in investment strategies, contributions or withdrawals may materially alter the performance and results of your portfolio.

Index returns assume reinvestment of all distributions. Historical performance results for investment indexes generally do not reflect the deduction of transaction and/or custodial charges or the deduction of an investment management fee, the incurrence of which would have the effect of decreasing historical performance results. It is not possible to invest directly in an index.

Source ICE Data Indices, LLC (“ICE”), used with permission. ICE permits use of the ICE indices and related data on an “asis” basis; ICE, its affiliates and their respective third party suppliers disclaim any and all warranties and representations, express and/or implied, including any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or use, including the indices, index data and any data included in, related to, or derived therefrom. Neither ICE data, its affiliates or their respective third party providers guarantee the quality, adequacy, accuracy, timeliness or completeness of the indices or the index data or any component thereof, and the indices and index data and all components thereof are provided on an “as is” basis and licensee’s use it at licensee’s own risk. ICE data, its affiliates and their respective third party do not sponsor, endorse, or recommend chandler asset management, or any of its products or services.

This report is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as a specific investment or legal advice. The information contained herein was obtained from sources believed to be reliable as of the date of publication, but may become outdated or superseded at any time without notice. Any opinions or views expressed are based on current market conditions and are subject to change. This report may contain forecasts and forward-looking statements which are inherently limited and should not be relied upon as indicator of future results. Past performance is not indicative of future results. This report is not intended to constitute an offer, solicitation, recommendation or advice regarding any securities or investment strategy and should not be regarded by recipients as a substitute for the exercise of their own judgment.

Fixed income investments are subject to interest, credit and market risk. Interest rate risk: the value of fixed income investments will decline as interest rates rise. Credit risk: the possibility that the borrower may not be able to repay interest and principal. Low rated bonds generally have to pay higher interest rates to attract investors willing to take on greater risk. Market risk: the bond market in general could decline due to economic conditions, especially during periods of rising interest rates.

Ratings information have been provided by Moody’s, S&P and Fitch through data feeds we believe to be reliable as of the date of this statement, however we cannot guarantee its accuracy.

Security level ratings for U.S. Agency issued mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”) reflect the issuer rating because the securities themselves are not rated. The issuing U.S. Agency guarantees the full and timely payment of both principal and interest.

LGIP Yields: Reported yields for local government investment pools may be presented as either the 30-day yield or the monthly distribution yield, as applicable. For certain funds, the 30-day yield is calculated using reported daily yield data. Yield calculations are subject to change and may not be directly comparable across funds.

LAIF Yields: Additional Disclosure for CA Clients - As a result of a reporting lag from the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), reported LAIF yieldsrepresent the most recently available Daily Effective Yield and may reflect data from approximately 7–10 days prior to month-end. 35 129
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
129 of 2882

BENCHMARK DISCLOSURES
Benchmark Disclosure
ICE BofA 1-5 Yr Unsubordinated US
Treasury & Agency Index
The ICE BofA 1-5 Year Unsubordinated US Treasury & Agency Index tracks the performance of US dollar denominated US Treasury and nonsubordinated US agency debt issued in the US domestic market. Qualifying securities must have an investment grade rating (based on an average of Moody’s, S&P and Fitch). Qualifying securities must have at least one year remaining term to final maturity and less than five years remaining term to final maturity, at least 18 months to maturity at time of issuance, a fixed coupon schedule, and a minimum amount outstanding of $1 billion for sovereigns and $250 million for agencies. 36 130
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
130 of 2882

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
26-14773 Agenda Date: 4/7/2026
Agenda #: 6.

Subject: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for February 2026.

Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for February 2026.

CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/3/2026
powered by Legistar™131
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
131 of 2882

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT

CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3220
CUPERTINO.GOV
1 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Date: April 7, 2026
Subject
Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for February 2026 Recommended Action
Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for February 2026 Reasons for Recommendation
Background
California Government Code Section 41004 states:

Regularly, at least once each month, the city treasurer shall submit to the city clerk a written report and accounting of all receipts, disbursements, and fund balances.

The city treasurer shall file a copy with the legislative body.

The City's Municipal Code Section 2.24.030 Monthly Reports states:

The Treasurer shall make monthly reports which conform to the requirements of Government Code Section 41004. Said reports shall be delivered to the City Council, the City Manager and made available for review by such other persons who may so request.

The Treasurer's Report (report and accounting of all receipts, disbursements, and fund balances) is made available to City Council in compliance with the aforementioned requirements.

Cash vs. Accrual Basis Accounting
Cash basis accounting and accrual basis accounting differ in the way revenues and expenses are recognized and recorded, primarily with regard to their timing.

Under cash basis accounting, revenues are recorded when payment is received, and expenses are recorded when payment is made. This method of accounting recognizes transactions only when cash changes hands. In contrast, accrual basis accounting 132
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
132 of 2882
2 recognizes revenues when they are earned (but not necessarily received) and expenses when they are incurred (but not necessarily paid). This method of accounting recognizes transactions as they occur, regardless of whether cash has been exchanged.

Receipts, disbursements, and cash balance are measured on a cash basis. The cash balance shows the total cash and investments in the City's accounts. The ending balance is the beginning balance plus receipts minus disbursements. Journal adjustments generally include transactions recorded in other systems and imported into New World, Councilapproved budget adjustments, quarterly Cost Allocation Plan (CAP) charges, and quarterly interest earnings.

Revenues, expenditures, and fund balance are measured on an accrual basis. As a result, the amount in fund balance does not mean the City has that much cash on hand. Instead, fund balance is the difference between assets and liabilities. The ending balance is the beginning balance plus revenues minus expenditures.

Treasurer's Report
The report provides an update on the City's cash and fund balances for February 2026.

The report is as of April 1, 2026.

Note: Beginning balances have been updated to account for any final adjustments made as part of the month-end close that could not be completed before the prior report’s preparation. These adjustments were necessary due to time constraints associated with completing the month-end close process and generating the report.

Receipts, Disbursements, and Cash Balance
The City's General Fund ending cash and investment balance was $201.4 million, decreasing by $0.4 million from the prior month. Receipts were $4.4 million, disbursements were $(5.3) million, and journal adjustments were $0.5 million for the month.

The City's total ending cash and investment balance was $316.0 million, decreasing by $0.3 million from the prior month. Receipts were $4.7 million, disbursements were $(6.6) million, and journal adjustments were $1.7 million for the month.

Journal adjustments included the following:
• Parks and Recreation transactions imported from Active Network into New World
• Worker’s Compensation journals
• LAIF investment transfer
• Investment Earnings
• Bank Fees
• Human Resources Department Reorg
133
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
133 of 2882
3 Fund Balance/Net Position
The City's General Fund ending fund balance was $141.0 million, decreasing by $0.1 million from the prior month due to revenues of $5.0 million and expenditures of $5.2 million.

The City's total ending fund balance was $244.2 million, decreasing by $27,772 from the prior month due to revenues of $6.5 million and expenditures of $6.5 million.

Sustainability Impact
No sustainability impact.

Fiscal Impact
No fiscal impact.

California Environmental Quality Act
Not applicable.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: __________________
Jonathan Orozco
Acting Director of Administrative Services and City Treasurer Approved for Submission by: __________________
Tina Kapoor
Interim City Manager
Attachments:

A – Report of City-wide Receipts, Disbursements, and Cash Balances February 2026 B – Report of City‐wide Fund Balances/Net Position February 2026 134
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
134 of 2882
February 2026 Report of City‐wide Receipts, Disbursements, and Cash Balances Cash and Investments (Unaudited)
Beginning Balance Ending Balance
Fund Type Fund Number/Name as of January 31, 2026 Receipts Disbursements Journal Adjustments as of February 28, 2026 General Fund 100 General Fund 201,800,347 12,164,627 (4,242,626) 120,630 209,842,979General Fund 130 Investment Fund 643,830 ‐ ‐ 432,049 1,075,879 Special Revenue Funds 210 Storm Drain Improvement 151,297 ‐ ‐ 1 151,298Special Revenue Funds 215 Storm Drain AB1600 2,323,857 5,279 ‐ 23 2,329,159 Special Revenue Funds 230 Env Mgmt Cln Crk Strm Drain 1,013,489 ‐ (108,165) 6 905,331 Special Revenue Funds 260 CDBG 542,248 122 (5,665) 8 536,714 Special Revenue Funds 261 HCD Loan Rehab 230,372 ‐ ‐ ‐ 230,372 Special Revenue Funds 265 BMR Housing 4,920,489 350 (84,798) 50 4,836,090 Special Revenue Funds 270 Transportation Fund 15,989,553 293,352 (259,138) (205,885) 15,817,881 Special Revenue Funds 271 Traffic Impact 930,830 6,797 ‐ 9 937,636 Special Revenue Funds 280 Park Dedication 21,227,642 15,000 ‐ 208 21,242,850 Special Revenue Funds 281 Tree Fund 77,312 ‐ ‐ 1 77,313 Debt Service Funds 365 Public Facilities Corp 2,436,800 ‐ (239,800) ‐ 2,197,000 Capital Project Funds 420 Capital Improvement Fund 36,788,186 ‐ (43,912) 61,348 36,805,622 Capital Project Funds 427 Stevens Creek Corridor Park 157,338 ‐ ‐ ‐ 157,338 Capital Project Funds 429 Capital Reserve* 7,142,250 ‐ ‐ ‐ 7,142,250 Enterprise Funds 520 Resource Recovery 4,913,351 140,397 (173,968) 51 4,879,831 Enterprise Funds 560 Blackberry Farm 882,819 ‐ (47,221) 52,522 888,120 Enterprise Funds 570 Sports Center 1,649,855 ‐ (118,476) 66,839 1,598,218 Enterprise Funds 580 Recreation Program 3,031,891 7,055 (90,172) 107,225 3,055,998 Internal Service Funds 610 Innovation & Technology 2,928,268 106 (348,127) 30 2,580,277 Internal Service Funds 620 Workersʹ Compensation 3,959,080 ‐ (5,539) (27,594) 3,925,948 Internal Service Funds 630 Vehicle/Equip Replacement 1,164,081 ‐ (247,320) 12 916,773 Internal Service Funds 641 Compensated Absence/LTD 420,044 ‐ 335 5 420,384Internal Service Funds 642 Retiree Medical 892,479 ‐ (149,821) 13 742,671 Total $ 316,217,707 $ 12,633,085 $ (6,164,412) $ 607,551 $ 323,293,931 * For reporting purposes, this fund rolls up/combines with Fund 420Printed March 23, 2026For more information on funds, please see cupertino.org/fund‐structure 135
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
135 of 2882
February 2026 Report of City‐wide Fund Balances/Net Position (Unaudited)
Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance
Fund Type Fund Number/Name as of January 31, 2026 Revenues Expenditures as of February 28, 2026 General Fund 100 General Fund 141,178,999 5,047,400 5,180,081 141,046,318 General Fund 130 Investment Fund 873,254 806,849 ‐ 1,680,104 Special Revenue Funds 210 Storm Drain Improvement 2,123,529 2 ‐ 2,123,531 Special Revenue Funds 215 Storm Drain AB1600 1,881,354 3,920 ‐ 1,885,274 Special Revenue Funds 230 Env Mgmt Cln Crk Strm Drain 1,961,180 48,726 83,413 1,926,493 Special Revenue Funds 260 CDBG 1,685,358 128 8,836 1,676,650 Special Revenue Funds 261 HCD Loan Rehab 222,016 ‐ ‐ 222,016 Special Revenue Funds 265 BMR Housing 9,568,777 414 47,994 9,521,197 Special Revenue Funds 270 Transportation Fund 10,728,088 143,805 136,321 10,735,572 Special Revenue Funds 271 Traffic Impact 772,538 12 ‐ 772,550 Special Revenue Funds 280 Park Dedication 18,785,733 15,277 69,617 18,731,393 Special Revenue Funds 281 Tree Fund 79,553 1,638 ‐ 81,191 Debt Service Funds 365 Public Facilities Corp 1,750 ‐ ‐ 1,750 Capital Project Funds 420 Capital Improvement Fund 23,429,539 ‐ 75,924 23,353,615Capital Project Funds 427 Stevens Creek Corridor Park 157,343 ‐ ‐ 157,343 Capital Project Funds 429 Capital Reserve* 13,744,638 ‐ ‐ 13,744,638 Enterprise Funds 520 Resource Recovery 4,827,611 158,680 115,496 4,870,795Enterprise Funds 560 Blackberry Farm 673,520 42,299 64,799 651,020 Enterprise Funds 570 Sports Center 1,943,485 83,582 115,434 1,911,633 Enterprise Funds 580 Recreation Program 3,022,246 122,754 68,069 3,076,931 Internal Service Funds 610 Innovation & Technology 1,476,429 38 302,536 1,173,932 Internal Service Funds 620 Workersʹ Compensation 2,140,102 51 14,457 2,125,696 Internal Service Funds 630 Vehicle/Equip Replacement 2,429,024 15 55,164 2,373,875Internal Service Funds 641 Compensated Absence/LTD 705,078 8,771 8,482 705,366 Internal Service Funds 642 Retiree Medical (167,549) 12 165,523 (333,060) Total $ 244,243,595 $ 6,484,374 $ 6,512,145 $ 244,215,824* For reporting purposes, this fund rolls up/combines with Fund 420 Printed March 23, 2026For more information on funds, please see cupertino.org/fund‐structure 136
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
136 of 2882

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
26-14970 Agenda Date: 4/7/2026
Agenda #: 7.

Subject: Consider adopting Resolution No. 26-034 to establish a Policy on Flags on City Property.

Adopt Resolution No. 26-034 to establish a Policy on Flags on City Property.

CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/3/2026
powered by Legistar™137
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
137 of 2882
CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE

CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3212
CUPERTINO.GOV

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Date: April 7, 2026
Subject
Consider adopting Resolution No. 26-___ to establish a Policy on Flags on City Property Recommended Action
Adopt Resolution No. 26-___ to establish a Policy on Flags on City Property Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options
The City displays Federal, State, and City flags at various City facilities daily as well as commemorative flags from time to time. In 2023, staff created an administrative policy governing the display of commemorative flags on City property. While that policy provided direction for a specific category of flag displays, it did not address broader City practices related to the display of federal, state, and City flags, or other ceremonial uses. The absence of a unified policy has resulted in ambiguity regarding permissible flag displays across City facilities.

To inform the development of this policy (Attachment A), staff reviewed flag policies from peer jurisdictions, including San Jose, to identify best practices in clarity, legal defensibility, and administrative implementation.

The proposed policy establishes comprehensive guidelines governing two primary categories of flag displays on City property:
• Federal, State, and City flags
• Ceremonial and commemorative flags
This policy ensures that the City remains compliant with federal and state laws including the U.S. Flag Code, and sets standards for the proper placement, order of precedence, and daily display of the United States, California State, and City of Cupertino flags across designated City facilities. The policy also formalizes procedures for recognized holidays and half-staff protocols.

In addition, it defines commemorative flags as expressions of the City’s official sentiment and clarifies that it is not a forum for public expression. The policy requires City Council approval for any such display, thereby ensuring consistency, transparency, and adherence to legal standards in all flag-related practices.
138
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
138 of 2882
Sustainability Impact
No sustainability impact.

Fiscal Impact
No fiscal impact.

City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description
None
Council Goal
Public Engagement and Transparency
California Environmental Quality Act
No California Environmental Quality Act impact.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Astrid Robles, Senior Management Analyst
Reviewed by: Kirsten Squarcia, Deputy City Manager
Floy Andrews, Interim City Attorney
Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager
Attachments:

A – Draft Resolution
B – Draft Policy on Flags on City Property
139
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
139 of 2882
RESOLUTION NO. ________

A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL

TO ESTABLISH A POLICY ON FLAGS ON CITY PROPERTY
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino desires to establish clear and consistent guidelines for the display of the flag of the United States of America, the California State flag, and the Cupertino City flag; and WHEREAS, the City also seeks to define the protocols for the display of ceremonial and commemorative flags at designated locations, including the Cupertino Civic Center, the Cupertino Service Center, and the Memorial Park Veterans Monument; and
WHEREAS, the City adheres to the standards set forth in the Federal “Our Flag” publication, the U.S. Flag Code (4 U.S.C. Title 4), and the State of California Government Code Sections 430 and 437; and
WHEREAS, this 2026 Flag Policy is intended to replace and repeal the previous 2023 Commemorative Flag administrative policy.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby Adopt a new Policy on Flags on City Property to establish clear, consistent, and legally compliant guidelines governing the display of flags on City property.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7
th day of April, 2026, by the following vote:

Members of the City Council
AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
140
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
140 of 2882
Resolution No. __________________

SIGNED:
___________
Kitty Moore, Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
_____________
Lauren Sapudar, City Clerk
________________________
Date
141
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
141 of 2882
Policy on Flags on City
Property
Citywide Policy Manual
Policy #
Attachments:

Effective Date: April 7, 2026 Responsible Department:

City Manager’s Office
Related Policies & Notes:

This policy repeals and replaces the 2023 Commemorative Flag administrative policy Purpose
The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for the display of (A) the exhibition of the flag of the United States of America, the California State flag, the Cupertino City flag, , and (B) the display of ceremonial/commemorative flags at the Cupertino Civic Center, the Cupertino Service Center, and the Memorial Park Veterans Monument at Memorial Park.

Policy
It is the policy of the City of Cupertino that flags should be displayed in conformance with Federal and State policies, as stated in the Federal “Our Flag” publication of the Congress, House Document No. 96-144 and the U.S. Flag Code (4 U.S.C. Title 4).; and the State of California Government Code Sections 430 and 437.

To establish a policy with respect to the locations and days when the United States of America, California State, and Cupertino City flags should be displayed, the following standards should be followed. The City Manager, or designee, is responsible for ensuring the proper execution of this policy.

Standards
A. Federal, State and City Flags

1. Outdoor flags will be flown in the following order of precedence: first, the United States flag; second, the California State flag; and third, the Cupertino City flag. The Prisoner-of-War/Missing-in-Action (“POW/MIA”) flag will be flown at the Veteran’s Memorial Monument.

2. When flown alongside the flag of another country, the U.S. flag will remain at full staff and in the center. Both the U.S. flag and the foreign flag shall be of equal size and height, with the foreign flag positioned to the left and the California flag to the right.
142
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
142 of 2882

3. For ceremonial or commemorative flag raisings, as approved by Council, the City of Cupertino flag may be lowered, and the ceremonial flag added as a second flag. The U.S. and State flags shall remain in place and unchanged.

4. Weather permitting, flags should be displayed daily in front of the locations specified in this policy.

5. Flags should not be displayed in inclement weather. However, all-weather flags may be flown on a 24-hour basis as long as they are illuminated from sunset to sunrise. The City Hall flags shall be all-weather flags, shall be flown on a 24-hour basis and shall be illuminated at night.

6. The Cupertino City flag will be flown wherever there are sufficient poles to do so in accordance with this policy. The City flag may be displayed on the same pole as, and underneath the State flag, whenever the pole is of sufficient height. The Federal, State, and City flags shall not be flown on a single pole of any height.

7. Unless otherwise directed by Federal and/or State authorities; on recognized Federal and/or State holidays and on other special occasions as listed below, flags should be flown as specified in this policy from all City-owned flagpole locations. a. January 1, New Year’s Day
b. January 20, (2001, 2005, 2009, etc., every fourth year) on the day the President of the United States is inaugurated
c. Third Monday in January, Martin Luther King’s birthday d. Third Monday in February, Presidents’ Day
e. Second Sunday in May, Mother’s Day
f. Third Saturday in May, Armed Services Day
g. Last Monday in May, Memorial Day. The flags to be flown at half-staff (first raise to top, then slowly lower to half-staff) until noon and at full staff from noon until sunset. NOTE: The United States flag must always be flown by itself when displayed at half-staff.
h. Third Sunday in June, Father’s Day
i. June 14, Flag Day
j. July 4, Independence Day
k. First Monday in September, Labor Day
l. September 9, Admission Day
m. September 17, Constitution Day
n. Second Monday in October, Columbus Day
o. The first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of a presidential election year and gubernatorial election days
p. November 11, Veteran’s Day
q. Fourth Thursday in November, Thanksgiving Day
143
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
143 of 2882
r. December 25, Christmas Day
s. State holidays
t. Special occasions of Federal, State and local proclamation

8. Flags at any City-owned flagpole locations shall be displayed in accordance with the above standards. However, the City Manager may order flags to be lowered to halfstaff including but not limited to flags of the United States of America and State of California in honor of the death of a City employee.

B. Commemorative Flags
A commemorative flag is any flag other than the United States flag, the State of California flag, or the City of Cupertino flag. The display of commemorative flags on City property serves solely as an expression of the City’s official sentiment and are not intended to serve as a forum for free expression by the public. The City maintains exclusive control over the decision to display commemorative flags on City property, and no commemorative flag may be displayed without approval by the City Council.
144
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
144 of 2882

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
26-14957 Agenda Date: 4/7/2026
Agenda #: 8.

Subject: Approval of a resolution to authorize application for the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant operated by the Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project.

Adopt Resolution No. 26-035 of the City Council authorizing the City to apply for funds through the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant Operated by The Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project.

CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/3/2026
powered by Legistar™145
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
145 of 2882

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT

CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3220
CUPERTINO.GOV

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Date: April 7, 2026
Subject
Approval of a resolution to authorize application for the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant operated by the Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project.

Recommended Action
Adopt Resolution No. 26-____ of the City Council authorizing the City to apply for funds through the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant Operated by The Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project.

Background
The City proposes seeking $500,000 in grant funds to implement critical components of the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project. The funds will be sought through application submission for the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant operated by Valley Water. Valley Water is a public agency providing water supply, flood risk reduction, and stream stewardship for Santa Clara County (County). The grant opportunity funds shovelready capital and implementation projects for creek restoration; water conservation infrastructure; enhanced wetland habitats; and removing non-native, invasive plant species and planting native species. Valley Water requires all applicants to obtain authorization for application from the applicant governing body.

The City has developed a conceptual plan for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail project which reflects community input and the goals laid out in the City’s 2020 Parks and Recreation System Master Plan. On June 11, 2024, the Parks and Recreation Commission considered the proposed final conceptual design and made a favorable recommendation to the City Council, as required by CMC section 19.92.040. The Final Conceptual Plan was approved by City Council at the July 2, 2024 meeting and is reflective of the following considerations:
• Represents directives received to date from the community, commissions, and City Council;
146
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
146 of 2882
• Is consistent with the Goals, Policies, and Strategies of the General Plan and the Parks and Recreation System Master Plan;
• Will not have significant negative impact on the environment; and • Provides the design intent for the future phases of design and construction of the park and trail.
• The Final Conceptual Design includes an extension of the Saratoga Creek/San Tomas Aquino trail, as well as nature play areas, native plant species, and picnic groves among other features.

On May 1, 2025, an update on this project was presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission, and subsequently the Public Works Department presented an informational memorandum update to City Council on July 24, 2025.

The full project budget approved by City Council on June 2, 2015, is $8,270,994, with an additional $910,000 appropriation being approved on March 8, 2022, for a total project budget of $9,180,994.

City staff anticipate applying for $500,000 in grant funding that, if awarded, will be available to expend within a 5-year timeframe from contract execution with Valley Water. The grant requires a 15% match that will be accounted for via the existing appropriation approved in June 2015.

Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options
Valley Water requires all grant applicants to provide written evidence of authorization to apply for the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant and recommends use of standard resolution language. Staff presents this request to Council due to the granting agency requirement. The Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project received broad public support, Parks and Recreation Commission support for the design presented in May 2025, and approval from Council. Throughout the development of the design, the City solicited public input via surveys, site pop-ups, community meetings, and presented at numerous commission meetings, and to the City Council, to gather input and ideas on the park's design and amenities. By applying for grant funds to offset the project budget, the City pursues external funding to advance priority project elements, while remaining responsive to public enthusiasm for this project. The recommendation to authorize application for grant funds through the Valley Water Standard Grants Program will allow staff to implement project elements with existing CEQA approval. Should Council not authorize application for grant funds, the City declines an opportunity to pursue a valuable funding opportunity to offset costs for a Council approved project. For these reasons, staff recommend authorization of application for grant funds.

Sustainability Impact
Approving a resolution to apply for grant funds will help the Project advance the Climate Action Plan 2.0 goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by improving walkability and expanding green spaces.

Fiscal Impact
147
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
147 of 2882
Approving this resolution to apply for grant funds positions the City to enter a competitive proposal process and if funded, accepting the grant reduces the City’s cost for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project by $500,000.

City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description
FY22-23 Lawrence Mitty Park Implementation Plan: Development project for Lawrence Mitty will be included in the CIP.

Council Goal:

Fiscal Strategy, Quality of Life
California Environmental Quality Act
The CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail project is completed and filed with the County.

The Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program was prepared and approved per state guidelines. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15064(f)(3) and 15070(b), a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for consideration as the appropriate CEQA document for the project. A mitigated negative declaration was adopted, and there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment.

Grant application itself is exempt from CEQA.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Veena Raghavan, Grants Analyst
Reviewed by: Jonathan Orozco, Acting Director of Administrative Services Chad Mosley, Director of Public Works
Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager
Attachments:

A – Draft Resolution
B – Sample FY26 Standard Grant Agreement Template
148
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
148 of 2882
RESOLUTION NO. 26-14957

A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL TO AUTHORIZE

APPLICATION FOR THE SAFE, CLEAN WATER AND NATURAL FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM 2026 STANDARD GRANT OPERATED BY THE

SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT (VALLEY WATER)
This resolution authorizes City of Cupertino staff to complete and submit an application for the 2026 Standard Grant Program under Valley Water to advance capital projects, for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail project (Project).

WHEREAS, Valley Water has enacted the 2026 Standard Grants Program - FY2026 Safe Clean Water Grant Program (Safe Clean Water), which provides funds for Implementation (Program) Grants; and
WHEREAS, Valley Water’s Office of Civic Engagement has been delegated the responsibility for the administration of the grant program, and establishing necessary implementation procedures; and
WHEREAS, said procedures established by Valley Water require Applicant’s Governing Body to certify by resolution Applicant’s approval to apply for and accept grant program funds; and
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino (Applicant) intends to enter into a Grant Agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Water District should grant funds be awarded; and
l NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby:

1. Approve the submission of an application for the 2026 Standard Grants Program under Valley Water, from the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program;

2. Approve the acceptance of grant funds from the 2026 Standard Grants Program under Valley Water, from the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program, upon approval of grant funding for the Project by appropriate authorities;

3. Certify that the City of Cupertino has or will have sufficient funds to operate and maintain the Project beyond the grant funding term;

4. Certify that Applicant will maintain an accounting system that:
149
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
149 of 2882
Resolution No. 26-14957

a. Accurately reflects fiscal transactions, with the necessary controls and safeguards;
b. Provides good audit trails, especially the source documents; and c. Provides accounting data so the total cost of the project can be readily determined.

5. Certify that Applicant will review and agree to all terms and conditions stated in the Agreement including the Special Provisions, General Provisions, Financial Provisions, and Insurance Requirements contained in the Agreement; and

6. Appoint the City Manager or designee as its authorized agent to conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all documents and reports including, but not limited to applications, agreements, payment requests and so on, which may be necessary for the performance and completion of the Project.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of April, 2026, by the following vote:

Members of the City Council
AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

SIGNED:
___________
Kitty Moore, Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
_____________
Lauren Sapudar, City Clerk
________________________
Date
150
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
150 of 2882

SAFE, CLEAN WATER AND NATURAL FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM
PROJECT F9 STANDARD GRANT AGREEMENT
Terms and Conditions Template (11-05-24)
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 1 of 25
This FY Select fiscal year Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program (Safe, Clean Water Program) Project F9 Standard Grant Agreement (Agreement), effective on the date stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information, is entered into by and between the Santa Clara Valley Water District, a California special district (Valley Water) and Legal Name of Grantee (Grantee). Valley Water and Grantee may be referred to individually as a Party or collectively as the Parties. This Agreement provides for funding to support Grantee’s Project Name Project (Project).

RECITALS
A. Valley Water’s mission is to provide Silicon Valley safe, clean water for a healthy life, environment, and economy.

B. In November 2012, the voters of Santa Clara County passed Measure B establishing a special tax to fund the Safe, Clean Water Program. In November 2020, the voters of Santa Clara County passed Measure S renewing the special tax until ended by voters.

C. The Safe, Clean Water Program special tax provides funding for activities focused on the priorities stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information.

D. The Grantee’s Board of Directors adopted a Resolution authorizing Grantee’s application for Safe, Clean Water Grant Program funding and acceptance of the grant, if awarded (see Appendix E, Resolution).

E. Grantee submitted an application to Valley Water’s Grant Program for its Project to carry out the scope as stated in Appendix B, Project Scope.

F. On the Award Date stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information, Valley Water’s Board of Directors authorized Valley Water’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO), following CEQA compliance, to approve and execute a grant agreement with Grantee to fund the Project in the amount not-to-exceed the Grant Amount stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information.

G. Consistent with its application submitted, Grantee has secured funding from Valley Water in the amount specified above and any additional funds necessary to complete the Project will be provided by the Grantee.

The Parties agree to the following terms and conditions:

SECTION 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
A. Definitions

1. Acquisition: to obtain fee title or a lesser interest in real property, including a conservation easement or development rights.

2. Agreement: this contract between Valley Water and the Grantee specifying the payment of funds by Valley Water for the performance of the Project Scope within the Project Performance Period by the Grantee.
151
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
151 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 2 of 25

3. Application: the Safe, Clean Water Program Standard Grant application and accompanying attachments submitted to Valley Water.

4. Development: the creation, by construction of or addition to existing facilities, of new watershed activities at the Project site.

5. Grant Program: Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program (Safe, Clean Water Program).

6. Project: Grantee’s Project as described in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information and Appendix B, Project Scope, approved for a grant award by Valley Water’s Board of Directors.

7. Project Completion: Project completion per requirements stated in Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion.

8. Project Grant Amount: the amount of Grant funds allocated by Valley Water’s Board to Grantee for the Project.

9. Project Performance Period: the Project period commencing either upon full execution of this Agreement by both Parties or retroactively as stated in the first paragraph of this Agreement and expiring as stated in Section 1. General Provisions, H. Agreement Term.

10. Property: the real property described in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information, for acquisition or development with the Project.

11. Safe, Clean Water Program: Valley Water’s Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program special tax approved by Santa Clara County voters in November 2012 and renewed by the voters in November 2020.

12. Total Project Cost: the full cost of the Project, including funds from all funding sources, as identified in Appendix D, Project Budget.

13. Valley Water: Santa Clara Valley Water District.

B. Project Execution

1. Valley Water hereby grants to Grantee the Project Grant Amount, in consideration of, and on condition that, the sum be expended for the sole purpose of carrying out the objectives as set forth in the Project as identified in Appendix B, Project Scope, consistent with the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.

2. Grantee is responsible for securing all other necessary funds to accomplish the Project. Any significant modification or alteration to the Project Scope is subject to prior consideration and approval by Valley Water. Such a request must be submitted in writing to the Valley Water Contact, per Section 4. Miscellaneous Provisions, B. Notices, of this Agreement. Valley Water’s disbursement of Grant funds is dependent on Valley Water approval of changes Valley Water deems are significant.
152
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
152 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 3 of 25

3. Grantee will complete the Project in accordance with Appendix A, Grant and Project Information, Appendix B, Project Scope, Appendix C, Project Schedule, and Appendix D, Project Budget.

4. Project Scope, Project Schedule, and Project Budget may only be adjusted pursuant to a written amendment to this Agreement, signed by both Grantee and Valley Water in advance of such adjustment.
a. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Project Schedule adjustments that do not impact the completion of the Project Scope prior to the expiration date of this Agreement; an adjustment of the amount budgeted for a task that is not more than 10% of that budgeted amount; and does not result in an increase of total grant amount specified in Recital F. of this Agreement, may be approved by the Valley Water Program Administrator in writing but without a formal amendment to this Agreement.
b. If there is an increase in the amount budgeted for a task, there must be a correlating simultaneous decrease of the same amount to another task(s) to ensure the total Project Grant Amount specified in Recital F. is not exceeded.

5. Compliance with All Laws
a. Grantee must comply with all applicable federal, state, and local codes, statutes, laws, regulations, and ordinances, including, but not limited to, financial requirements, legal requirements for construction contracts, building codes, health and safety codes, laws and codes pertaining to individuals with disabilities, and Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams (which can be found at
https://www.valleywater.org/contractors/doing-businesses-with-the-district /permits-for-working-on-district-land-or-easement/guidelines-and-standard s-for-land-use-near-streams).
b. CEQA Compliance
(1) (STANDARD CEQA) If the Grantee is a public agency, the Grantee will be the lead agency for purposes of complying with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In that case, the Grantee shall complete the CEQA review process and submit required documentation to Valley Water prior to Valley Water disbursing any grant funds.
(2) (STANDARD CEQA) If the Grantee is a non-governmental entity and if no other public agency shall be the CEQA lead agency pursuant to section 15051 of the CEQA Guidelines, Valley Water will be the lead agency for purposes of CEQA. Valley Water may request that the Grantee provide environmental information about the Project to assist Valley Water’s CEQA review. The disbursing of the grant funds is contingent upon Valley Water’s completion of the CEQA review.
(3) The required CEQA documentation must include one of the following: a notice of exemption filed with the Santa Clara County 153
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
153 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 4 of 25
Office of the Clerk/Recorder (Clerk) in the case of an exempt project, or otherwise an environmental impact report, mitigated negative declaration or negative declaration along with a copy of the notice of determination filed with the County Clerk. (4) Grantee shall fulfill all the lead agency responsibilities, including consultation with Valley Water and any other applicable responsible agencies. The disbursing of grant funds is contingent on Valley Water completing CEQA review, if required, as a responsible agency.
c. For projects subject to CEQA review by Valley Water, Valley Water has not committed to a definite course of action by executing this Agreement and is not limited in any way in exercising any discretion with respect to the Project, including but not limited to (1) considering other feasible alternatives and mitigation measures to avoid or minimize Project impacts, (2) requiring Grantee to make such modifications deemed necessary to reduce Project impacts, or (3) determining not to proceed with one or more component of the Project.

6. Grantee must have access rights to perform onsite Tasks, if any, as described in Appendix B, Project Scope; Appendix C, Project Schedule; and Appendix D, Project Budget, on real property it does not own. Written permission must be secured prior to Grantee’s performance of onsite Tasks. Documentation of such permission must be made available to Valley Water upon its request. a. Acceptable types of Grantee’s real property access rights include:
(1) Fee title;
(2) Leasehold or other rental agreement arrangement;
(3) Easement (temporary or permanent);
(4) Permit for site access such as a permit to enter (including, if applicable, a Valley Water encroachment permit to access Valley Water real property or easement area(s)); or
(5) Other type of written permission (such as by hard or soft copy communication), documenting Grantee’s real property access rights necessary for Grantee’s performance of this Agreement.

7. Grantee must either be issued an encroachment permit by Valley Water or enter into a Joint Use Agreement for use of any Valley Water property, prior to execution of this Grant Agreement, or prior to reimbursement of grant funds for this Project, at Valley Water’s discretion. However, nothing shall alter any preexisting right the Grantee may have.

8. Grantee must provide metadata for spatial data required for identifying the location and alignment of the Project site per Valley Water’s Geographical Information System data standards.
154
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
154 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 5 of 25
C. Project Administration/Reporting Requirements

1. Grantee shall provide written quarterly reports (on a fiscal year schedule), using the Valley Water’s Grant Status Report Form. Reports will be completed and submitted in conjunction with invoicing as appropriate. Status reports shall include an update per task as included in Appendix B, Project Scope.

2. Grantee shall provide one hard copy and one electronic version of items listed in Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion.

3. All reports submitted to Valley Water must include the following certification page signed by an officer of Grantee’s organization:
“I certify, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the Quarterly/Monthly Status Report and all attachments, signed on the date below, on behalf of Grantee, were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the loss of the current and future Grant Funding.”

4. Quarterly and final reporting will end with submittal of Project Completion packet (see Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion).

D. Termination of this Agreement

1. Either Grantee or Valley Water may unilaterally terminate this Agreement at any time by providing 30 days written notice to the other Party.

2. Failure by Grantee to comply with the terms of this Agreement may be cause for suspension or termination of funding by Valley Water. Additionally, in the event of failure to complete Project, Grantee may be required to repay Valley Water for funds received, including interest earned at Valley Water’s pooled portfolio monthly interest yield corresponding to the month(s) the funds were due to Valley Water.

E. Indemnification

1. In lieu of and notwithstanding the pro rata risk allocation, which might otherwise be imposed between the Parties pursuant to Government Code Section 895.6, the Parties agree that all losses or liabilities incurred by a Party shall not be shared pro rata but, instead, Valley Water and Grantee agree that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, each of the Parties hereto shall fully indemnify and hold each of the other Parties, their officers, board members, employees, and agents, harmless from any claim, expense or cost, damage or liability imposed for injury (as defined in Government Code 810.8) occurring by reason of the negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of the indemnifying Party, its officers, employees, or agents, under or in connection with or arising out of any 155
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
155 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 6 of 25
work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to such Party under this Agreement. No party, nor any officer, board member, employees, or agent thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of the negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of the other Party hereto, its officers, board members, employees, or agents, under or in connection with or arising out of any work authority or jurisdiction delegated to such other Party under this Agreement.

The rights, duties, and obligations of the Parties as set forth above in this paragraph E. Indemnification, survive completion, termination, expiration, and suspension of this Agreement.

F. Equal Opportunity

1. Valley Water is an equal opportunity employer and requires its Grantee to have and adhere to a policy of equal opportunity and non-discrimination. In the performance of the Agreement, Grantee will comply with all applicable federal, state, local laws and regulations, and will not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee, or applicant for employment in the recruitment, hiring, employment, utilization, promotion, classification or reclassification, transfer, recruitment advertising, evaluation, treatment, demotion, layoff, termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selection for professional development training (including apprenticeship), or against any other person, on the basis of sex (which includes pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding and medical conditions related to pregnancy, childbirth, or breastfeeding), race, religion, color, national origin (including language use restrictions), ancestry, religious creed (including religious dress and grooming practices), political affiliation, disability (mental and physical, including HIV or AIDS), medical condition (cancer and genetic characteristics), genetic information, marital status, parental status, gender, age (40 and over), pregnancy, military and veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, the exercise of family and medical care leave, the exercise of pregnancy disability leave, or the request, exercise, or need for reasonable accommodation.

2. Grantee’s policy must be in conformance with applicable state and federal guidelines including the Federal Equal Opportunity Clause, 41 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 60-1, §60-1.4; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (§503 and §504); the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. §6101 et seq.); the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code §12900 et. seq.); and California Labor Code §1101 and §1102.

3. Grantee must designate a specific position within its organization to be responsible for investigating allegations of non-compliance with the antidiscrimination and anti-harassment provisions of this Agreement. Grantee must conduct a fair, prompt, and thorough investigation of all allegations directed to Grantee by Valley Water. In cases where such investigation results in a finding of discrimination, harassment, or hostile work environment, Grantee must take prompt, effective action against the offender.

G. Project Completion

1. After Grantee completes the Project by meeting all requirements stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information, Grantee must submit the Project 156
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
156 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 7 of 25
Completion packet detailed in a. – f. below to the Valley Water Contact and it must include:
a. Final Payment Request Form;
b. Sample Project Invoice Template;
c. Final Grant Status Report Form, including documentation of accomplishments;
d. Notice of Completion for public works construction projects; e. Written communication from Grantee stating that Project is complete, including list of tasks completed and signature by authorized representative; and
f. Presentation to the Valley Water Board of Directors on completed Project.

Valley Water will provide Grantee with approximate Board presentation date prior to expiration of the Agreement Term. Alternatively, Valley Water may require a final report which includes a presentation file and a factsheet be posted on Grantee’s website and which Valley Water may post on its own website.

2. Valley Water conducts final on-site Project inspection as it deems necessary, if appropriate.

3. Valley Water processes Grantee’s invoice for final payment.

H. Agreement Term

1. Provided Valley Water has approved of Grantee’s compliance with all Insurance Requirements as set forth in Appendix F, Insurance Requirements, the term of this Agreement commences on the Agreement Effective Date stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information.

2. Approval of this Agreement by both Parties is necessary for any disbursement of Grant funds.

3. This Agreement expires upon the earliest of: Project Completion in accordance with Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion or Agreement Expiration Date stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information.

I. Insurance Provisions

1. During the entire term of the Agreement, Grantee must maintain the insurance coverages described in Appendix F, Insurance Requirements.

SECTION 2. SPECIAL PROVISIONS
A. Within the Project Performance Period, Grantee will mention the Project and Valley Water’s Safe, Clean Water Program as a funding source in at least one article published in any newspaper, magazine, e-newsletter or social media that the Grantee issues or submits materials to for publication.
157
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
157 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 8 of 25
B. Grantee shall post signs acknowledging Valley Water’s participation in the development of the Project and the use of Safe, Clean Water Program funds, should there be an implementation component. Grantee will include the Valley Water logo in all collateral materials identifying Valley Water as a funding source for the development of those materials. Valley Water to provide sign template(s) and logo(s) to Grantee, upon request, for use in Project where feasible.

C. Grantee shall invite, in writing, members of the Valley Water Board to participate in any groundbreaking, opening, or ribbon-cutting ceremony associated with the Project. Board members will be given the opportunity to speak if other elected officials have speaking roles. Grantee will notify Valley Water at least two (2) weeks prior to the ceremony.

D. After Project completion, Grantee, upon Valley Water request, will make a presentation at a Valley Water Board meeting or other venue within Santa Clara County.

E. Public Access to Completed Project. Project will be open to members of the public generally during hours specified by the Grantee, except as noted in the Special Provisions of this Agreement, pursuant to provisions of the enabling legislation and/or Program, or any joint use agreement with Valley Water.

SECTION 3. FINANCIAL PROVISIONS
A. Accounting and Audit Requirements

1. Grantee must maintain an accounting system that accurately reflects fiscal transactions, with the necessary controls and safeguards. Grantee should provide clear audit trails, especially the source of original documents such as, but not limited to, receipts, progress payments, invoices, timecards, etc.

AVOID AUDIT EXCEPTIONS – KEEP ACCURATE RECORDS.

2. Grantee agrees that Valley Water and its agent(s) have the right to review, obtain, and copy all records pertaining to performance of this Agreement.

Grantee agrees to provide Valley Water and its agent(s), with any relevant information requested, in electronic and hard copy format, at Valley Water’s discretion, and will permit Valley Water and its agent(s), access to Grantee’s premises, upon reasonable notice, during normal business hours, for the purpose of interviewing Grantee’s employees (alternatively, by phone) and inspecting or copying books, records, accounts, computerized records, and other materials that may be relevant to the matter under investigation for the purpose of determining compliance with this Agreement. Grantee further agrees to maintain such records for a period of three (3) years after final payment made in accordance with this Agreement.

3. Grantee’s detailed budget is included as Appendix D, Project Budget and is consistent with Grantee’s Project Proposal. The Project Budget will be used by Valley Water as the basis for evaluating Grantee’s invoices for Grant funds. In cases where invoices are inconsistent with the Project Budget, invoices must either be revised for consistency or an amendment to this Agreement may be necessary to align the Project Budget with the actual reimbursable expenditures for the Project.

4. Grantee must document its eligibility for award and receipt of Safe, Clean Water Grant Funds by verifying it is not included in any current Federal List of Parties 158
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
158 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 9 of 25
Excluded from Federal Procurement or Non-procurement Programs. Exclusion of Grantee from this list, verified at:
http://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/compliance/preaward/debarlst.htm, demonstrates the Grantee’s good status regarding suspension and debarment and eligibility for Safe, Clean Water Grant Program funds.

5. Grantee is responsible for repayment to Valley Water of any disallowed cost.

Disallowed costs may be identified through audits, monitoring, or other sources of information that become available to Valley Water after Valley Water has satisfied an invoice from Grantee and disbursed Safe, Clean Water Grant funds.

6. Construction costs are deemed “reasonable” if obtained by competitive bidding, or by other legal means as demonstrated by Grantee.

B. Eligible Costs

1. Total Project Grant Amount is not-to-exceed the amount stated in Recital F. and will be disbursed to Grantee according to the terms and conditions as stated in Section 3. Financial Provisions, C. Payment Request Process and D. Invoicing.

2. Only Project-related costs incurred during the Project Performance Period, excluding costs incurred prior to and during preparation of the Grant application, specified in this Agreement are eligible for reimbursement. All such costs must be supported by appropriate documentation, including but not limited to subcontractor invoices and receipts.

3. Personnel or Employee Services. Services of the Grantee’s employees engaged in Project execution are eligible costs. These direct labor costs must be computed according to the Grantee’s prevailing wage or salary scales and may include a loaded hourly rate, consisting of indirect overhead and fringe benefit costs such as vacation, sick leave and social security contributions that are customarily charged to the Grantee’s various projects for which the Grantee has submitted a Loaded Hourly Rate Calculation to Valley Water. Costs charged to the Project must be computed on actual time spent on a project and supported by time and attendance records describing the work performed on the Project.

Overtime costs may be allowed under the Grantee’s established policy, provided that the regular work time was devoted to the same Project.

4. Salaries and wages claimed for employees working on Grant-funded Project(s) must not exceed the Grantee’s established rates for similar positions.

5. Project costs for non-construction tasks are limited to 20% of Valley Water contribution to Total Project Cost, for projects that include a construction task.

6. Consultant Services. The costs of consultant services necessary for the Project are eligible. Consultants must be paid by the customary or established method and rate of the Grantee. No consultant fee may be paid to the Grantee’s own employees.

7. Construction Equipment. Equipment owned by Grantee may be charged to the Project for each use. Equipment-use charges must be made in accordance with the Grantee’s normal accounting practices. The equipment rental rates published by the California Department of Transportation may be used as a guide. 159
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
159 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 10 of 25
a. If the Grantee’s equipment is used, a report or source document must describe the work performed, indicate the hours used and relate the use to the Project.
b. The purchase of equipment with Grant funds is not permissible.

8. Construction Supplies and Materials. Supplies and materials may be purchased for a specific project or may be drawn from a central stock, provided they are claimed at a cost no higher than that paid by the grant recipient. Supplies and materials purchased for the construction of a piece of equipment, a structure or a part of a structure may be charged to the Project. If charged, only that cost incurred during the Project performance period and attributed to the Project may be claimed.

9. Signs and Interpretive Aids. The cost of signs, display boards, or other minor interpretive aids relating to the Project are eligible.

10. Construction. The costs of all necessary construction activities, from site preparation (including demolition, excavation, grading, etc.) to the completion of a structure or facility are eligible.

11. Acquisition. Costs of acquiring real property interests are eligible and may include the purchase price of the property, appraisals, surveys, preliminary title reports, escrow fees, title insurance fees.

12. Relocation Costs. Relocation costs are allowable for projects that result in displacement of any person and/or business. The Grantee must comply with all federal and local laws, as well as the requirements of the State Relocation Act (Chapter 16 Government Code §7260 et seq.), if applicable, even if relocation costs are not claimed for reimbursement.

13. Other Expenditures. In addition to the major categories of expenditures, reimbursements may be made for miscellaneous costs necessary for execution of the Project. Examples of such costs include:
a. Postage; and
b. Transportation costs for moving equipment and/or personnel. (REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
C. Payment Request Process

1. This Grant Agreement is based on a reimbursement model with specific details as noted below:
a. Grantee may submit multiple Payment Request Forms as necessary, but not more often than monthly.
b. After Grantee completes the Project, Grantee submits the Project Completion Packet (see Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion) and the Payment Request Form for the final payment. 160
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
160 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 11 of 25

PAYMENT REQUEST PROCESS
Payment Type When to
Submit It
Supporting Documentation to
Send to Program Administrator
Payment Request
Reimbursement
(up to 90% of the
total Project Grant
Amount)
Once Grantee can
provide evidence
to show significant
progress toward
completing Project
tasks
• Payment Request Form
• Project Invoice Template
• Grant Status Report Form
• For direct expenses, copies of invoices with all
attachments shall be submitted
• For labor costs, copies of timesheets shall be submitted • For Benefits Costs, a Benefits Rate Calculation will be submitted
• Documentation of accomplishments (i.e., draft and final plans, designs, etc.)
Final (10%) After Grantee has
completed the
Project
• Project Completion packet (see Section 1. General
Provisions, G. Project Completion)
D. Invoicing

1. The Project Invoice shall accompany the Payment Request Form and shall incorporate Grantee name and remittance address, a description/itemization of goods or services, dollar amount of goods or services, invoice date and number, and Agreement number. Work performed shall be determined on a per task basis as outlined in the Project Scope (Appendix B) and Project Schedule (Appendix C). All requests for reimbursements will be accompanied by materials providing evidence of significant Project progress accomplishments commensurate with level of reimbursement requested.

2. Valley Water will review Grantee’s invoice within ten working days from receipt and advise Grantee of any disputed items. Valley Water will review and approve undisputed invoices within ten working days from receipt and issue payment within thirty (30) calendar days from receipt. Valley Water will pay invoices within thirty (30) calendar days from date invoice is approved by Valley Water’s Program Administrator.

3. Grantee’s invoice must include invoices from subcontractors documenting task, task budget, percentage complete, prior billing if any, current billing, and total billed. Documentation supporting Grantee’s invoice(s) must document work performed consistent with the frequency of Grantee’s invoices to Valley Water.

4. Failure to submit an accurate financial invoice in a timely manner may result in payments being withheld, delayed, or denied, and will result in payment delays.

SECTION 4. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
A. Miscellaneous Provisions

1. Grantee’s waiver of any term, condition, covenant, or breach of any term, condition or covenant shall not be construed as a waiver of any other term, condition, or covenant or breach by any other term, condition, or covenant. 161
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
161 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 12 of 25

2. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between Valley Water and Grantee relating to the Project. Any prior agreements, promises, negotiations, or representations not expressly set forth in this Agreement are of no force or effect.

3. The Parties agree that this Agreement is to be governed, construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The Parties also agree that the venue of any litigation arising out of or connected with this Agreement will lie exclusively in the state trial court or Federal District Court located in Santa Clara County in the State of California. The Parties consent to jurisdiction over their persons and over the subject matter of any such litigation in such courts, and consent to service of process issued by such courts.

4. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which, when executed and delivered, will be deemed to be an original; which taken together will be deemed to be the one and same instrument; and will be binding as executed.

5. Grantee’s request(s) for minor modification(s) to the Grant and Project Information, Project Scope, Project Schedule, or Project Budget must be submitted in writing, prior to the expiration of this Agreement, and will be considered for approval by Valley Water Program Administrator responsible for the Safe, Clean Water Grant Program provided:
a. The Grant award by Valley Water’s Board did not impose a restriction on such revisions; and
b. No additional Grant funds are requested. All such requests will be considered by Valley Water’s executive management responsible for the Safe, Clean Water Grant Program.

6. Revisions to the Project Scope, Project Schedule, or Project Budget are subject to review and prior approval of Valley Water.

7. An extension to the term of this Agreement for a period up to twelve (12) months beyond the current expiration date may be approved by Valley Water. Requests for term extensions must be submitted in writing and received no later than sixty (60) calendar days prior to the expiration of this Agreement. Grantee must submit sufficient documentation in support of its request to enable Valley Water’s executive management to evaluate Grantee’s request. Valley Water’s executive management will consider criteria such as the following:
a. The amount of Grant funds not yet disbursed to Grantee; b. Grantee’s progress in completing the Project Scope and the reasons supporting any delays;
c. Whether Grantee has the dedicated human and financial resources to continue to complete the Project Scope during the extension period; and d. Whether such extension is in the best interest of Valley Water.

8. If approved by Valley Water, an amendment to this Agreement, extending its Term, must be executed in full prior to the original expiration date as stated in Section 1. General Provisions, H. Agreement Term. If this Agreement is not 162
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
162 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 13 of 25
extended prior to its expiration, any unexpended Grant funds will be retained by Valley Water and unavailable to the Grantee for the Project.

9. All Appendices, A (Grant and Project Information), B (Project Scope), C (Project Schedule), D (Project Budget), E (Resolution), and F (Insurance Requirements) are hereby incorporated herein by this reference and made a part hereof, as though set forth in full.

10. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions of the Agreement which can be given effect without the invalid provision, and to this end the provisions of this Agreement are severable.

11. Survival. Section 3. Financial Provisions, B. Eligible Costs, C. Payment Request Process, and D. Invoicing, shall survive completion, suspension, termination, and expiration of this Agreement such that any Eligible Costs incurred during the Project Performance Period may be invoiced by Grantee and paid by Valley Water provided invoices, including final invoice, are submitted prior to the expiration date of this Agreement as stated in Section 1. General Provisions, H. Agreement Term.

B. Notices
All notices and other communication required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be personally delivered or mailed, postage prepaid and return receipt requested, addressed to the respective Representatives stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information:

C. Agreement Execution
Unless otherwise prohibited by law or policy of either Party, the Parties agree that an electronic copy of a signed agreement, or an electronically signed agreement, has the same force and legal effect as an agreement executed with an original ink signature.

The term “electronic copy of a signed agreement” refers to a transmission by facsimile, electronic mail, or other electronic means of a copy of an original signed agreement in a portable document format. The term “electronically signed agreement” means an agreement that is executed by applying an electronic signature using technology approved by Valley Water.
163
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
163 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 14 of 25

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE PARTIES HAVE SET FORTH BELOW THEIR CONSENT TO

THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT THROUGH THE SIGNATURES OF THEIR DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES.

LEGAL NAME OF GRANTEE
Date: By:
[Authorized Signatory]
[Title]

SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
Date: By:

Chief Executive Officer
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
164
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
164 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 15 of 25

APPENDIX A
Grant and Project Information
SECTION 1. GRANT INFORMATION
A. GRANTEE:

Enter Legal Name of Grantee; will autofill throughout
B. PROJECT NAME:

Enter Project Name; will autofill throughout
C. GRANT TYPE:

Make a selection.

D. GRANT PRIORITIES:

Make a selection.

E. AWARD DATE:

Select a date.

F. AGREEMENT EFFECTIVE DATE:

Make a selection.

G. AGREEMENT EXPIRATION DATE:
years from Agreement Effective Date
H. ENTITY TYPE:

Make a selection.

I. GRANT AMOUNT:
$0.00
J. REPRESENTATIVES:

Valley Water:

Rachael Gibson
Chief of External Affairs
Santa Clara Valley Water District
5750 Almaden Expressway
San Jose, CA 95118-3686
Email: [email protected]
165
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
165 of 2882

APPENDIX A
Grant and Project Information (continued)
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 16 of 25
Valley Water Primary Representative:

Amy Fonseca
Program Administrator
Santa Clara Valley Water District
5750 Almaden Expressway
San Jose, CA 95118
Phone: (408) 630-3005
Primary email: [email protected]
Secondary email: [email protected]
Grantee:

First and Last Name
Title
Address
City, State, Zip Code
Phone: (XXX) XXX-XXXX
Email: Email Address
Grantee Primary Representative:

Primary Representative or Authorized Signatory First and Last Name Title
City, State, Zip Code
Phone: (XXX) XXX-XXXX
Email: Email Address
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
166
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
166 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 17 of 25

APPENDIX B
Project Scope
167
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
167 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 18 of 25

APPENDIX C
Project Schedule
Any changes in this Project Schedule will be reported in the Grant Status Report using the template included as Appendix H, and are subject to approval by Valley Water. Changes in the Project Schedule are acceptable provided they do not extend performance of Grant-funded tasks beyond the expiration date of this Agreement.

Estimated schedule is shown below.

Task Start Date End Date
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
168
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
168 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 19 of 25

APPENDIX D
Project Budget
169
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
169 of 2882
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 20 of 25

APPENDIX E
Resolution
170
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
170 of 2882

APPENDIX F
Insurance Requirements (continued)
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 21 of 25

APPENDIX F
Insurance Requirements
Please Note: Failure to comply with the instructions below could result in a delay in executing the Agreement. Valley Water will not be responsible for time lost or costs incurred due to failure to comply with these requirements. Please note the checklist of documents needed at the end of this Appendix F Insurance Requirements.

Without limiting the Grantee's indemnification of, or liability to, the Santa Clara Valley Water District (“Valley Water”), the Grantee must provide and maintain at its own expense, during the term of this Agreement, or as may be further required herein, the following insurance coverages and provisions as listed below.

Grantee must provide its insurance broker(s)/agent(s) with a copy of these requirements and warrants that these requirements have been reviewed by Grantee’s insurance agent(s) and/or broker(s), who have been instructed by Grantee to procure the insurance coverage required herein.

In addition to certificates, Grantee must furnish Valley Water with copies of all original endorsements affecting coverage required by this Appendix. The certificates and endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements and certificates are to be received and approved by Valley Water before the Agreement is effective. In the event of a claim or dispute, Valley Water has the right to require Grantee's insurer to provide complete, certified copies of all required pertinent insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by this Appendix F Insurance Requirements.

If your insurance broker has any questions about the above requirements, please advise him/her to call the Valley Water Risk Manager.

CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE
Grantee shall furnish Valley Water with a Certificate of Insurance. The certificates will be issued on a standard ACORD Form.

Grantee shall instruct their insurance broker/agent to submit all insurance certificates and required notices electronically in PDF format to the designated Valley Water Program Administrator and email a copy to [email protected].

The certificates will:

1. Identify the underwriters, the types of insurance, the insurance limits, the deductibles and the policy term;

2. Include copies of all the actual policy endorsements required herein; and 171
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
171 of 2882

APPENDIX F
Insurance Requirements (continued)
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 22 of 25

3. In the “Certificate Holder” box include:

Santa Clara Valley Water District
Attention: Amy Fonseca
5750 Almaden Expressway
San Jose, CA 95118
Agreement No. XXXXX
IMPORTANT: The agreement number must be included.

4. In the Description of Operations/Locations/Vehicles/Special Items Box:
a. Certificate Holder shall be named as Additional Insured; b. Valley Water agreement or project number shall appear; c. The list of policies scheduled as underlying on the Umbrella policy shall be listed; and
d. Waiver of Subrogation must be indicated as endorsed to all policies.

If Grantee receives any notice that any of the insurance policies required by this Appendix F Insurance Requirements may be cancelled or coverage reduced for any reason whatsoever, Grantee or insurer shall immediately provide written notice to the designated Valley Water Program Administrator that such insurance policy required by this Appendix F Insurance Requirements is canceled or coverage is reduced.

MAINTENANCE OF INSURANCE
If Grantee fails to maintain such insurance as is called for herein, Valley Water, at its option, may suspend payment for work performed and/or may order Grantee to suspend all Grantee’s work at Grantee’s expense until a new policy of insurance is in effect.

RENEWAL OF INSURANCE
Grantee will provide Valley Water with a current Certificate of Insurance and endorsements within Thirty (30) business days from the expiration of insurance.

Grantee shall instruct its insurance broker/agent to:

1. Submit all renewals of insurance certificates and required notices electronically in PDF format to: [email protected]; cc: [email protected]

2. Provide the following information in the “Certificate Holder” box:

Santa Clara Valley Water District
Attention: Amy Fonseca
5750 Almaden Expressway
San Jose, CA 95118
Agreement No.

IMPORTANT: The agreement number must be included.
172
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
172 of 2882

APPENDIX F
Insurance Requirements (continued)
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 23 of 25
Grantee must, at its sole cost and expense, procure and maintain during the entire period of this Agreement the following insurance coverage(s).

REQUIRED COVERAGES

1. Commercial General/Business Liability Insurance with coverage as indicated:
$1,000,000 per occurrence/$1,000,000 aggregate limits for bodily injury and property damage.
$1,000,000 Products/Completed Operations aggregate (to be maintained for at least three (3) years following acceptance of the work by Valley Water.

General Liability insurance must:
a. Be written on standard ISO forms and approved by Valley Water Risk Manager. b. Include coverage at least as broad as found in standard ISO form CG 0001. c. Include Premises and Operations.
d. Include Contractual Liability expressly including liability assumed under this contract.
e. If Grantee will be working within fifty (50) feet of a railroad or light rail operation, any exclusion as to performance of operations within the vicinity of any railroad bridge, trestle, track, roadbed, tunnel, overpass, underpass, or crossway must be deleted, or a railroad protective policy in the above amounts provided. f. Include Owners and Grantee’s Protective liability.
g. Include Severability of Interest.
h. Include Explosion, Collapse and Underground Hazards, (X, C, and U). i. Include Broad Form Property Damage liability.
j. Contain no restrictive exclusions (such as but not limited to CG 2153, CG 2144 or CG 2294).

Valley Water reserves the right to require certain restrictive exclusions be removed to ensure compliance with the above.

2. Business Auto Liability Insurance with coverage as indicated:
$1,000,000 combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage per occurrence, covering all owned, non-owned and hired vehicles.

Excess or Umbrella policies may be used to reach the above limits for the General Liability and/or Business Auto Liability insurance limits; however, all such policies must contain a primacy clause (See Section 2, General Conditions) and meet all other General Conditions below.
173
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
173 of 2882

APPENDIX F
Insurance Requirements (continued)
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 24 of 25

3. Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance Statutory California Workers’ Compensation coverage covering all work to be performed for Valley Water.

Employer Liability coverage for not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence.

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
With respect to all coverages noted above, the following additional requirements apply:

1. Additional Insured Endorsement(s): Grantee must provide an additional insured endorsement for Commercial General/Business Liability and Business Automobile liability coverage naming the Santa Clara Valley Water District, its Directors, officers, employees, and agents, individually and collectively, as additional insureds, and must provide coverage for acts, omissions, etc., arising out of the named insureds’ activities and work. NOTE: This section does not apply to the Workers’ Compensation.

2. Primacy Clause: Grantee will provide evidence (either through the Certificate of Insurance, endorsement or language in the insurance contract) that Grantee’s insurance is primary with respect to any other insurance which may be carried by Valley Water, its Directors, its officers, agents and employees, and Valley Water’s coverage must not be called upon to contribute or share in the loss. NOTE: This section does not apply to the Workers’ Compensation policies.

3. Cancellation Clause: Grantee will provide endorsements for all policies stating that the policy will not be cancelled without 30 days prior notification to Valley Water.

4. Acceptability of Insurers: All coverages must be issued by companies admitted to conduct business in the State of California, which hold a current policy holder’s alphabetic and financial size category rating of not less than A-V, according to the current Best's Key Rating Guide or a company of equal financial stability that is approved by Valley Water’s Risk Manager. Non-Admitted companies may be substituted on a very limited basis at the Risk Manager’s sole discretion.

5. Self-Insured Retentions or Deductibles: Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by Valley Water. At the option of Valley Water, either:
the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects Valley Water, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Grantee shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the Entity guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses. Grantee agrees that in the event of a claim they will pay down any agreed upon SIR in a prompt manner as soon as bills are incurred in order to trigger the insurance related to the SIR.

6. Subcontractors: The Grantee shall secure and maintain or shall be responsible for ensuring that all subcontractors performing the Contract Services secure and maintain all insurance coverages appropriate to their tier and scope of work in a form and from insurance companies reasonably acceptable to Valley Water.

7. Amount of Liability Not Limited to Amount of Insurance: The insurance procured by Grantee for the benefit of Valley Water must not be deemed to release or limit any 174
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
174 of 2882

APPENDIX F
Insurance Requirements (continued)
FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name]
Version MM/DD/YY Page 25 of 25
liability of Grantee. Damages recoverable by Valley Water for any liability of Grantee must, in any event, not be limited by the amount of the required insurance coverage.

8. Coverage to Be Occurrence Based: Except for Professional Liability, all coverage must be occurrence-based coverage. Claims-made coverage is not allowed.

9. Waiver of Subrogation: Grantee agrees to waive subrogation against Valley Water to the extent any loss suffered by Grantee is covered by any Commercial General Liability policy, Automobile policy, Workers’ Compensation policy described in Required Coverages above. Grantee agrees to advise its broker/agent/insurer and agrees to provide evidence (either through the Certificate of Insurance, endorsement or language in the insurance contract) that subrogation has been waived by its insurer.

10. Non-compliance: Valley Water reserves the right to withhold payments to the Grantee in the event of material noncompliance with the insurance requirements outlined above.

CHECKLIST OF DOCUMENTS NEEDED
General Liability: A. Limits ($1,000,000)
B. Additional Insured (Endorsement)
C. Waiver of Subrogation (COI, Endorsement or policy language) D. Primacy (COI, Endorsement or policy language)
E. Cancellation Endorsement
Auto Liability: A. Limits ($1,000,000)
B. Additional Insured (Endorsement)
C. Waiver of Subrogation (COI, Endorsement or policy language) D. Primacy (COI, Endorsement or policy language)
E. Cancellation Endorsement
Umbrella: A. Limits ($)
B. Primacy (Endorsement or policy language)
Workers’ Comp: A. Limits ($1,000,000)
B. Waiver of Subrogation (Endorsement or policy language) C. Cancellation Endorsement
Appendix F, StandardGrantsGL_rev. 09.24.25.
(REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)
175
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
175 of 2882

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
26-14985 Agenda Date: 4/7/2026
Agenda #: 9.

Subject: Approve a budget modification in the amount of $475,000 for ballot measure preparation services and County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voter election services fees.

1. Approve a Budget Adjustment in the amount of $475,000 in the General Fund for ballot support services with TeamCivX and election services fees from the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters (GL# 100-41-405 700-702)

2. Adopt Resolution No. 26-036 approving budget modification #2526-437, approving a additional General Fund appropriation in the amount of $475,000 for ballot support services with TeamCivX and election services fees from the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters (GL# 100-41-405 700- 702).

CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/3/2026
powered by Legistar™176
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
176 of 2882
1 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT

CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3220
CUPERTINO.GOV

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Date: April 7, 2026
Subject
Approve a budget modification in the amount of $475,000 for ballot measure preparation services and County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voter election services fees.

Recommended Action

1. Approve a Budget Adjustment in the amount of $475,000 in the General Fund for ballot support services with TeamCivX and election services fees from the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters (GL# 100-41-405 700-702)

2. Adopt Resolution No. 26-xxx approving budget modification #2526-437, approving a additional General Fund appropriation in the amount of $475,000 for ballot support services with TeamCivX and election services fees from the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters (GL# 100-41-405 700-702).

Background
The City is currently forecasting a revenue shortfall in future fiscal years due to increases in the County of Santa Clara Sheriff contract for public safety services. In response, on February 19 staff presented to City Council potential revenue generating measures for consideration. Council directed staff to further analyze business tax, the Utility User Tax (UUT), and sales tax options in addition to other measures to create cost effectiveness while retaining business competitiveness.

On March 3, Council directed staff to return with a plan for a proposed parkland ballot measure that would provide further protections for recreational facilities and parkland sites.

On March 17, Council considered additional analysis on business tax, UUT, and sales tax options and directed staff to contract for ballot measure support services that will evaluate expanding and/or extending the UUT that expires during fiscal year 2030-31 and pursuing a parkland rezoning protection effort. In March 2026, staff conducted a competitive procurement process and selected TeamCivX to provide feasibility assessment, awareness building, and ballot measure development services for each of these potential ballot measures. A contract with TeamCivX is currently in development and will be awarded under the City Manager’s authority with City Council budget approval. The County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters administers the election on behalf of the City and charges fees for election services, including labor, materials, and administrative support necessary to conduct the election. 177
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
177 of 2882
2 Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options
To adequately prepare for placing any ballot measure on the November 3, 2026, general election, it is important to begin feasibility assessment services with TeamCivX in April 2026. These efforts will include a thorough assessment of the local landscape, recent election results and additional research to design an opinion survey of local voters. This survey will consider extending the current UUT and possible slight increase in the tax rate while also soliciting feedback on a parkland rezoning measure. The opinion survey will be reviewed and approved by staff before it is conducted with a representative sample of likely voters in Cupertino. The results of the feasibility assessment will generate recommendations for how to structure the ballot measure(s), necessary communication to support the measure and, if the ballot measure(s) do not appear viable, recommended alternative strategies for pursuit. These recommendations will be provided to Council for consideration on which measure(s) to pursue.

If Council determines to not proceed with either measure, staff will terminate the remaining contract tasks with TeamCivX and conclude this effort. If Council determines a ballot measure should be pursued, staff will engage TeamCivX to provide awareness to Cupertino residents and businesses of the proposed measure(s) and offer opportunities for community input. All communications will be reviewed by staff and the City Attorney’s Office to ensure it complies with state law. After collecting input through the outreach measures, TeamCivX will work closely with the City in developing the ballot measure language for the City Attorney’s review before providing to the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters. Staff will provide updates to Council as the City proceeds with informational communication to Cupertino residents and businesses, and through development of the ballot measure.

Based on the information presented, staff recommends approving the budget adjustment so feasibility assessment efforts can begin for potential ballot measures related to UUT and parkland rezoning.

Sustainability Impact
No sustainability impact.

Fiscal Impact
An additional General Fund appropriation of $475,000 is requested to support ballot measure preparation services and fees for election services provided by the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters. A corresponding increase in appropriations to the applicable budget (100-41- 405 700-702) is required, as no funding is currently allocated for these services.

The estimated cost to complete the initial feasibility assessment phase, including survey design, polling, and analysis of voter sentiment, is approximately $74,000, with total costs dependent on the scope of services, including outreach and ballot measure development.

If Council elects not to proceed with one or both ballot measures following the feasibility assessment, any remaining appropriated funds will be returned to the General Fund.

City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description
None
178
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
178 of 2882
3 Council Goal:

N/A.

California Environmental Quality Act
No California Environmental Quality Act impact.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Greg Card, Purchasing Manager
Reviewed by: Jonathan Orozco, Acting Director of Administrative Services Floy Andrews, Interim City Attorney
Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager
Attachments:

A – Draft Budget Resolution
179
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
179 of 2882
Attachment A
RESOLUTION NO. 26-XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26

BY APPROPRIATING, TRANSFERRING, AND UNAPPROPRIATING

MONIES FOR SPECIFIED FUNDS
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 amended appropriations, and therefore recommends the fund reallocations described herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the recommended fund reallocations 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 7th day of April 2026, by the following vote:

Vote Members of the City Council
AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
180
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
180 of 2882
Attachment A
SIGNED:
________
Kitty Moore, Mayor
City of Cupertino
________________________
Date
ATTEST:
________________________
Lauren Sapudar, City Clerk
________________________
Date
181
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
181 of 2882
Attachment A
Exhibit A
Appropriation
Amendment by Fund
Appropriation
Amendment
Revenue
Amendment
Fund Balance
(Use of)
General Fund (100) 475,000 - (475,000)
Total Appropriation
Amendment All Funds $475,000 $- $(475,000)
182
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
182 of 2882

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
26-14994 Agenda Date: 4/7/2026
Agenda #: 10.

Subject: Authorization for Mayor to Sign Multi-Jurisdictional Letter Regarding State Housing Legislation.

Authorize the Mayor to sign a joint letter with West Valley Mayors requesting the State Legislature to consider a temporary pause on new housing legislation to allow for evaluation and implementation of existing laws.

CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/3/2026
powered by Legistar™183
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
183 of 2882
CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE

CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3212
CUPERTINO.GOV

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Date: April 7, 2026
Subject
Authorization for Mayor to Sign Multi-Jurisdictional Letter Regarding State Housing Legislation
Recommended Action
Authorize the Mayor to sign a joint letter with West Valley Mayors requesting the State Legislature to consider a temporary pause on new housing legislation to allow for evaluation and implementation of existing laws.

Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options
Mayor Mark Turner from the City of Morgan Hill has prepared a letter addressed to the Speaker of the California State Assembly requesting a temporary pause on the adoption of new housing legislation and has requested other neighboring cities to consider signing the letter as well. The letter cites the significant volume of housing-related laws enacted in recent years and the resulting challenges local jurisdictions face in implementation, administration, and compliance.

The letter emphasizes that while cities remain committed to addressing the State’s housing goals, the pace of legislative changes has created operational and resource constraints. It requests a two-year pause to allow for evaluation of recently adopted laws, identification of potential conflicts or redundancies, and assessment of outcomes and impacts. Mayor Turner is requesting the Mayors from all cities within Santa Clara County to sign the letter to create a joint letter from all neighboring jurisdictions to express shared concerns regarding the implementation of state housing mandates.

If approved, the draft letter (Attachment A) will be updated to list the City of Cupertino as an additional signer with the City logo added to the letter.

Sustainability Impact
No sustainability impact.
184
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
184 of 2882
Fiscal Impact
No fiscal impact.

City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description
None
Council Goal
Public Engagement and Transparency
California Environmental Quality Act
No California Environmental Quality Act impact.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Astrid Robles, Senior Management Analyst
Reviewed by: Kirsten Squarcia, Deputy City Manager
Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager
Attachments:

A – Letter from Mayor Turner to Speaker Rivas
185
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
185 of 2882
March 12, 2026
Dear Speaker Rivas,
Thank you for the opportunity to attend your Legislative Day on February 25. I greatly appreciated the invitation and the chance to hear directly about your priorities as well as from other legislators. The dialogue and engagement were both informative and encouraging.

I am writing to respectfully request your leadership in considering a temporary pause on the passage of new housing legislation while the Legislature undertakes a comprehensive review of the significant body of housing laws enacted in recent years. Your suggestion to examine what is working and what is not within our existing statutory framework is both timely and prudent.

Over the past several years, nearly 150 housing-related bills have been signed into law, with approximately 50 new housing measures enacted in 2025 alone. Many of the 2025 measures went into effect with the Governor’s approval of the budget. This extraordinary pace reflects the Legislature’s strong commitment to addressing California’s housing challenges. However, the volume and speed of these changes have created substantial implementation pressures for local governments charged with carrying them out.

City governments across the state are increasingly overwhelmed by the continuous stream of new housing legislation introduced and enacted each legislative cycle. Planning departments, housing divisions, and legal teams are working diligently to interpret, integrate, and operationalize new requirements, often while prior mandates are still in early stages of implementation. The result is a growing strain on administrative capacity, limited opportunity to evaluate outcomes, and difficulty ensuring consistent and effective application of state policy.

Our state and regional agencies are attempting to provide technical assistance related to implementation but that is also delayed with the quantity of new mandates. Guidance on implementation often comes six months to a year after the mandate is in effect.

A deliberate pause would not signal retreat from the state’s housing goals. Rather, it would demonstrate a commitment to thoughtful governance and evidence-based policymaking. Taking the next two years to refrain from enacting additional housing statutes would provide the Legislature, in partnership with local governments and stakeholders, with the opportunity to:
• Review housing laws passed within the last four years • Evaluate measurable outcomes and unintended consequences • Identify redundancies, conflicts, or areas requiring clarification • Assess administrative and fiscal impacts on local jurisdictions • Strengthen and refine existing statutes where necessary 186
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
186 of 2882
Such a review would help ensure that California’s housing framework is coherent, effective, and sustainable. It would also allow local municipalities to focus on full and faithful implementation of existing mandates rather than continuously adjusting to new ones.

Your leadership in advancing a structured review process could foster collaboration between the State and local governments, strengthen public confidence, and ultimately produce more durable and impactful housing policy.

Thank you for your continued commitment to addressing California’s housing needs and for considering this request. I appreciate your thoughtful attention to this matter and your ongoing service to the people of California.

Sincerely,
Mark Turner
Mayor
187
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
187 of 2882

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
25-14593 Agenda Date: 4/7/2026
Agenda #: 11.

Subject: Consider a Use Permit, Tentative Map, Architectural and Site Approval, and Tree Removal Permit for the construction of a 122-unit residential development, consisting of 66 small-lot single family homes and 56 townhomes located at the Stevens Creek Office Center site, which includes a multi-tenant retail building (Voyager Coffee and Panera Bread). 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: Kevin Choy, Harvest Properties; Location: 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd; APNs: 326-32-050, -051, -052, and -053.)

1. Find the project statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and

2. Approve the following permits:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 26-037 approving Use Permit (U-2024-008) (Attachment A); and b. Adopt Resolution No. 26-038 approving Architectural & Site Approval Permit (ASA-2024-011) (Attachment B); and
c. Adopt Resolution No. 26-039 approving Tentative Map (TM-2026-006) (Attachment C); and d. Adopt Resolution No. 26-040 approving Tree Removal permit (TR-2024-033) (Attachment D).

CITY OF CUPERTINO Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/3/2026
powered by Legistar™188
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
188 of 2882

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3308
CUPERTINO.GOV

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Date: April 7, 2026
Subject
Consider a Use Permit, Tentative Map, Architectural and Site Approval, and Tree Removal Permit for the construction of a 122-unit residential development, consisting of 66 small-lot single family homes and 56 townhomes located at the Stevens Creek Office Center site, which includes a multi-tenant retail building (Voyager Coffee and Panera Bread). 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: Kevin Choy, Harvest Properties; Location: 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd; APNs: 326-32-050, -051, -052, and -053.) Recommended Action

1. Find the project statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and

2. Approve the following permits:
a. Adopt Resolution No. 26-XXX approving Use Permit (U-2024-008) (Attachment A); b. Adopt Resolution No. 26-XXX approving Architectural & Site Approval Permit (ASA2024-011) (Attachment B); c. Adopt Resolution No. 26-XXX approving Tentative Map (TM-2026-006) (Attachment C); d. Adopt Resolution No. 26-XXX approving Tree Removal permit (TR-2024-033) (Attachment D).

Executive Summary
This report outlines a project proposed by Harvest Properties for a 122-unit housing development, including 66 single-family homes and 56 townhomes, across four existing parcels.

The report covers the applicable State laws, including the Housing Accountability Act, Housing Crisis Act, No Net Loss law, and Density Bonus law, and local standards applicable to the project.

The report also includes a summary of the Planning Commission hearing on March 24, 2026, including public comment, Planning Commission discussion, and additional information on citylead outreach efforts to on-site retail tenants. Finally, the report summarizes the findings necessary for the Council to take action on the project. 189
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
189 of 2882
2 Discussion
Project Data
General Plan Land
Use Designation
Commercial / Office / Residential with a maximum residential density of 25 du/acre*
Special Planning
Area
Heart of the City Specific Plan (Crossroads subarea)
Zoning Designation P(CG, Res)*
Lot Area 6.93 acres (gross), 6.84 acres (net)
Allowed/Required Proposed
Maximum Density Up to 25 units per acre* 17.84 units per acre Height of Structures Max. 45 feet measured from
sidewalk to top of cornice,
parapet, or eave line of a peaked
roof.
50’-6”
(Waiver)
Setbacks
Front 35 feet from edge of curb 32 feet from edge of curb (Waiver) Sides One-half height of buildings or 10’,
whichever is greater
(16’ to 25’-3”)
Townhomes: 6’ to 10’
Detached SFDs: 8’ to 9.5’ (Waiver)
Rear One & one-half height of building,
with a minimum of 20’ (64’)
10’ 1” (Waiver)
Usable Open Space
Common 150 square feet per unit of multiunit buildings (8,400 square feet)183 square feet (average per attached unit)
Private
60 square feet per unit and no
dimension less than 6 feet
Between 61 square feet – 642 square
feet per unit.

Project Consistency with:

General Plan1 Consistent under SB 330 & state density bonus law.

Specific Plan2 Consistent under state density bonus law. Density bonus waivers requested for setbacks, building height, and Heart of the City Landscape Easement.
1 The applicable General Plan can be found online at
https://records.cupertino.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=1019620&dbid=0&repo=CityofCupertino&_gl=1*g ufghv*_ga*OTc5OTgwMjc4LjE3NDQ3Mzc0NDM.*_ga_NCY1KGMD5Y*czE3NDkwMDIwNzAkbzY2JGcxJ HQxNzQ5MDAyMDgwJGo1MCRsMCRoMA.
2 The applicable version of the Heart of the City Specific Plan can be found online at https://www.cupertino.gov/files/assets/city/v/1/departments/documents/communitydevelopment/planning /and-use-plans/heart-of-the-city-specific.pdf.
190
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
190 of 2882
3 Zoning Consistent under SB 330 and state density bonus law. Density bonus waivers requested for lot coverage, number of stories, setbacks, minimum lot width.
* Since the project utilizes the provisions of SB 330 (as discussed later in the report) the development standards, regulations & fees applicable at the time of submitting a SB 330 preliminary application apply. One of the sites (APN: 326-32-050) is a Housing Element site (Priority Housing Site no. 9) in the 6th Cycle Housing Element, with a General Plan land use designation of High/ Very High Density Residential, with a minimum density of 50 du/ac and a maximum density of 65 du/ac, and has a zoning designation of R-4. However, the applicant vested the project prior to the adoption of the current Housing Element & under SB 330, the applicable General Plan land use designation is Commercial/Office/Residential with a maximum residential density of 25 du/ac and an applicable zoning designation of P(CG/Res) – Planned Development Zoning District intended to be developed with General Commercial and residential uses.

Background
On April 1, 2024, the City received an SB 330 pre-application to redevelop the property located at 20807, 20813, 20823 and 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd. The project site is located within the Crossroads subarea of the Heart of the City (“HOC”) Specific Plan Area. The applicant subsequently submitted a formal project application for the proposal on September 25, 2024, within 180 days of the submission of the SB 330 pre-application, which granted it certain vesting privileges under State law.

The 6.84 net-acre property is
comprised of four parcels
bound by Stevens Creek
Boulevard to the south and
Alves Drive to the north.

The site is currently
developed with 1- and 2-
story office buildings and a
retail commercial building
with surface parking.

The project site shares a
property line with
Abundant Life Assembly of
God Church, Whole Foods
Market, and a single-family
home to the west; and a
commercial strip mall (Saich
Way Station) and Happy
Child Development Center
to the east. Other surrounding uses include single-family homes, duplexes, and the YMCA located across Alves Drive to the north, and the recently approved SummerHill townhome development (currently occupied by Staples, and the former Fontana’s and Pizza Hut buildings) 191
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
191 of 2882
4 across Stevens Creek Boulevard to the south. The Target Bottegas Center is located directly across from Saich Way, to the east of the project site (See Figure 1).

Existing uses at the site consist of roughly 109,000 square-feet of office space and 7,000 squarefeet of retail space. Approximately 107,000 square feet of office space is currently occupied by several office tenants; all retail square footage is occupied by two tenants, Panera Bread and Voyager Coffee.

The south-west corner of the site (APN 326-32-050), outlined in black in Figure 1, was designated as a Priority Housing Site through the adoption of the City’s 2024 Housing Element update in May 20243 and rezoned two months later, in July, to accommodate high-density residential development. The current land use designation for APN 326-32-050 would require a minimum density of 50.01 units per acre and a maximum of 65 units per acre. However, when the SB 330 preliminary application was submitted in April 2024, the City’s Housing Element had not yet been officially certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). This allowed the applicant to “lock in” the development standards that were in place at the time of their preliminary application submittal. Therefore, the project site is subject to the development standards of the General Plan, Heart of the City Specific Plan, and Planned Development “P” zoning designation, as they were in April of 2024. In April 2024, the parcels had a land use designation of Commercial/Office/Residential which allowed residential development of up to 25 units per acre and a zoning designation of P(CG,Res).

The “P” zoning designation is detailed in Cupertino Municipal Code, Chapter 19.80, Planned Development Zones. The “P” zoning designation is intended to provide a means of guiding land development or redevelopment within the city that is uniquely suited for planned coordination of land uses and land development. Where residential development is proposed on properties in the Planned Development zoning district, and where the Specific Plan is silent, development must adhere to Multifamily (R-3) zoning regulations. Principally, the proposed project consists of 56 townhome-style condominiums and 66 detached single-family dwellings. Since the project is 100% residential, review of the project is limited by several applicable State laws, including the Housing Accountability Act, the Housing Crisis Act (SB 330), and Density Bonus Law (Attachment E).

While the first two State laws apply because the project meets the definition of a “housing development project,” State density bonus law applies because the project proposes to provide qualifying amounts of affordable housing. Twenty percent, or 244 of the proposed 122 residential units, will be affordable to moderate- and median-income households, consistent with the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) requirements, making the project eligible for all applicable benefits of State density bonus law. It is important to note that, while qualifying projects are allowed to increase their density and the total number of units proposed, an applicant may also elect to only utilize the available waivers, concessions, or the reduced parking standards, without providing additional density bonus units, as is the case with the proposed project. The project includes a 3 The City’s Housing Element is available online at: Cupertino.gov/gp. 4 The Project is required to provide 24.4 units (20% of 122 units). Pursuant to the City’s BMR program, 24 units will be provided on site, and 0.4 units will be paid in in-lieu fee. 192
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
192 of 2882
5 request for 12 waivers and one concession from applicable standards of the General Plan, HOC, BMR Manual and Zoning Code. These requests are discussed later in this report.

Project Proposal
The project applicant, Harvest Properties, is proposing a 122-unit residential development, consisting of a mixture of detached single-family residences and townhome-condominiums. The project consists of seven 8-plex townhome buildings, all located on the south side of the site closer to Stevens Creek Boulevard, and 66 detached single-family residences, located along Alves Drive and the remainder of the site (see Attachment 7: Site Plan and Renderings).

The project is comprised entirely of three-story
buildings with 33 of the 122 units having
fourth-floor access to proposed roof top decks.

The 56 townhome units range in size (including
garage space) from 2,273 square feet to 3,304
square feet; and the 66 detached single-family
residences (including garage space) will be
either 2,973 square feet or 3,541 square feet.

As required by the City’s Below Market Rate
(BMR) Housing Program, 24 of the proposed
units will be affordable housing units for sale to
median- and moderate-income households5
(see Figure 2). The applicant proposes that all
BMR units will be located in the townhomes; no
single-family homes are being offered as BMR
units. Based on the scope of project, the City has
required the following entitlements: Use
Permit, Architectural and Site Approval, Tree Removal Permit, and a Vesting Tentative Map.

Architecture and Site Design
The project places denser townhome development closer to Steven’s Creek Boulevard in an attempt to blend in with the urban, commercial character of the Crossroads subarea. A variety of materials and colors are proposed to accentuate changes in building plane, which is intended to add visual interest to the architecture without having to rely on faux ornamentation. Roof decks are provided throughout the site for a total of 33 townhomes and single-family residences. All new residences will provide one private balcony on the second floor; additionally, each detached single-family residence will include private side yards at each unit. An approximately 32--footwide “central green” is provided as a buffer between the single-family neighborhood and the slightly denser townhome portion of the development.
5 Due to limitations of Government Code § 65103.5, the distribution of copyrighted material associated with the review of development projects is limited. Plans have been emailed under separate cover to allow the Commissioners to review the proposed plans. Commissioners and Councilmembers cannot share plans with outside parties, including community members. The public is able to make an appointment with the Planning Division to view these plans at City Hall.
193
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
193 of 2882
6 The applicant has proposed a combination of three different architectural styles that alternate throughout the site: 1) Spanish Revival, 2) Modern French and 3) Craftsman. The Spanish style features lower-pitched roofs with gable ends, traditional stucco finishes, and arched or corbeled entries. The Modern French style includes shallow-pitched main roofs with steeper gable ends, simple bay window details, and fiber cement panel accents. The Craftsman style, applied only to the single-family detached homes, features a 6:12 roof pitch, gable ends with shingle-style siding, deep eaves with detailed trim, as well as bracket and corbel details.

The majority of the trees proposed for the interior of the site are also deciduous, providing flowers and/or foliage color. The primary water classification for new trees and landscape on site fall within low to moderate water usage. Shrubs will be utilized to screen all above ground utilities, as permitted by PG&E regulations. Private seven-foot-wide side yards are provided for all 66 detached single-family residences. A six-foot-tall’ “good neighbor” wood fence will be used to create private backyards between each detached unit.

Pedestrian walkways will be large, tile-stamped concrete, with color accents incorporated in walkways in common areas. Common areas will be planted with shade trees and provide a mix of benches, seat walls, tables, and chairs for residents. Public art will be centered in the main common area with accessible pedestrian walkways (with a proposed public access easement) provided from both Stevens Creek Blvd. and Alves Drive. Crosswalks throughout the site will be delineated with an Ashlar pattern stamped asphalt in earthtone shades. The applicant will continue the decorative brick paving within the public right-of-way along Stevens Creek Blvd, adjacent to the accessible path of travel. This will connect the existing decorative paving pattern from 20807 Steven’s Creek Blvd to 20955 Steven Creek Blvd. This improvement will complete the decorative brick pavers along the entire frontage of the project site.

The project falls within the Crossroads subarea: Flowering Orchard Guidelines as identified in the Heart of the City Specific Plan. Accordingly, the existing Flowering Pear trees along the frontage of Steven’s Creek Blvd are proposed to remain and be protected in place; in addition, four new Flowering Pear trees are proposed to fill in the west parkway along Steven’s Creek Blvd as required by the Heart of the City Specific Plan.

Analysis
General Plan Compliance
The proposed project consists of a residential development consistent with the site’s General Plan Land Use Designation of Commercial/Office/Residential. The General Plan designation allows a maximum density of 25 dwelling units per acre, which equates to 173 units for the 6.93-acre site.

The General Plan does not require a minimum density. The 122 units proposed is well below the maximum allowed by the General Plan and is consistent with the density in effect when the SB 330 Preliminary Application was submitted.

Staff has evaluated the project’s consistency with the General Plan and concludes that based on the conformance with the General Plan Land Use designation for the site, the general alignment of design with applicable General Plan requirements, notwithstanding the limitations of State law, and the absence of environmental impacts analyzed in the Notice of Exemption memo (see 194
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
194 of 2882
7 Environmental Review section of this Staff Report), the proposed project supports several of the City’s General Plan goals, as outlined below.

Policy LU-2.2: Pedestrian-Oriented Public Spaces. Require developments to incorporate pedestrian-scaled elements along the street and within the development such as parks, plazas, active uses along the street, active uses, entries, outdoor dining & public art. • Policy LU-3.3: Building Design. Ensure that building layouts and design are compatible with the surrounding environment and enhance the streetscape and pedestrian activity. • Strategy LU-3.3.10: Entrances. In multi-family projects where residential uses may front on streets, require pedestrian-scaled elements such as entries, stoops, and porches along the street.
• Policy LU-27.2: Relationship to the Street. Ensure that new development in and adjacent to neighborhoods improve the walkability of neighborhoods by providing inviting entries, stoops and porches along the street frontage, compatible building design and reducing visual impacts of garages.
• Policy INF 2.4.2 Development. Require undergrounding of all utility lines in new developments and highly encourage undergrounding in remodels or redevelopment of major projects.
• Strategy HE-2.3.7: Density Bonus Ordinance. The City will encourage use of density bonuses and incentives, as applicable, for housing developments which include:
o At least 10 percent of the housing units in a for-sale common interest development are restricted to moderate-income residents.

Specific Plan Compliance
The project site is in the Heart of the City Special Area – Crossroads Subarea. The City’s HOC Specific Plan establishes building heights, setbacks, and other development requirements for projects within this area. The proposal includes several density bonus waivers for setbacks, building height, lot coverage, and reduced parking garage dimension requirements from the Municipal Code and HOC standards, which are discussed in further detail in the density bonus section of the staff report.

The project has incorporated some site design requirements, which are consistent with the remaining applicable requirements of the HOC Specific Plan.

Tree Removal and Replacement
The project site contains 251 on-site trees and 18 off-site trees. Six of the off-site trees are street trees within the public right-of-way, and the remaining 12 off-site trees are on private property along the western property line. The proposal includes the removal of 249 protected development trees within the construction footprint. Two native coast live oaks are located off-site (on the Abundant Life Church property to the west) and will be protected in place. An arborist report was prepared for the applicant by Michelia Arboriculture, LLC and was peer reviewed by the City’s third-party consultant, HortScience | Bartlett (Attachment F). The report and peer review concluded that 249 of the trees proposed for removal would be within the construction footprint and could not be preserved or otherwise adequately protected during construction. All 18 off-site trees are proposed to remain and will be protected in place. This is inclusive of the existing six 195
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
195 of 2882
8 Callery Pear street trees along Steven’s Creek Blvd., the species is consistent with the requirements of the Heart of the City Specific Plan “flowering orchard” planting theme.

The City’s requirements for tree replacement, consistent with Cupertino Municipal Code Section

14.18.160 (A), are as follows:

Diameter of Trunk
of Removed Tree
# of Trees Proposed
for Removal
Replacement Tree
Size Required
Replacement Trees
Required
12 inches or less 134 One 24" box tree 134 (24” box trees) Greater than 12
inches and up to 18
inches
37 Two 24" box trees or
One 36" box tree
74 (24” box trees)
or
37 (36” box trees)
Greater than 18
inches and up to 36
inches
69 Two 24" box trees or
One 36" box tree
138 (24” box trees)
or
69 (36” box trees)
Over 36 inches 9 One 36" box tree 9 (36” box trees)
Total: 249 (24” box trees) or 63 (24” and 36” box tree mix) The applicant proposes to replace 249 trees with 151 on-site trees of various species. Replacement trees will be either 24 or 36-inch box in size, consistent with Municipal Code tree replacement requirements. Since the applicant proposes to pay an in-lieu of planting a replacement tree fee for the remainder of the trees due to the lack of available replanting space on-site, the valuation of the trees not being replaced upon removal has been calculated based on the standards outlined in CMC 14.18.160 Tree Replacement. The in-lieu of replacement fee has been calculated to be approximately $147,422.00, which will be paid prior to issuance of site improvement/grading permits. It is noted that if the landscape plan needs to be revised due to code compliance requirements, the replacement plantings and in-lieu fee payment may be adjusted prior to issuance of building permits. This is reflected in the conditions of approval included with the Tree Removal Permit resolution.

All new development trees and landscaping planted on-site will be considered protected, and a condition of approval has been included to require that an agreement be executed to ensure the ongoing preservation, maintenance, and protection of the new trees and landscaping by future property owners.

Vesting Tentative Map
The application for the Vesting Tentative Map (VTM) proposes to subdivide the four existing lots to create a condominium subdivision. The map proposes to establish 66 single-family lots and 56 condominium (air-space) parcels for the proposed townhome units with additional roadway and open space parcels to support the development. The approval of a vesting tentative map confers a vested right to proceed with development in substantial compliance with the city's ordinances, policies, and standards in effect at the date the City determined the application was complete. 196
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
196 of 2882
9 Use Permit
The project proposal requires a Use Permit to allow the development of residential units on a non-Housing Element site6. Under the regulations in effect at the time of submittal of the SB 330 Preliminary Application, the General Plan and Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 19.80: Planned Development (P) Zones required that a residential development proposed on a site that is not a Priority Housing Site be a conditional use. The applicant proposes building exclusively residential units and the project is, therefore, required to obtain Conditional Use Permit approval as part of its entitlement process.

Park Land Dedication
Under Cupertino Municipal Code Section 13.08.050(A), proposed developments of more than 50 units must provide park land on-site and/or pay an in-lieu fee for the required park land dedication. The project would be required to provide approximately 0.58 acres of park area or an in-lieu of dedication fee, based on Municipal Code Chapter 13.08 requirements. The applicant has requested to pay an in-lieu fee instead of providing parkland. Based on the property size, project size, the provision of common open space, and the location of the property within a quarter mile of existing park facilities7, staff recommends the payment of an in-lieu fee rather than requiring the dedication of onsite park land. Thus, the project is conditioned to pay a parkland in-lieu fee.

Since the project includes 24 deed-restricted affordable units, consistent with the City’s Housing Element policies and the BMR Mitigation Manual, these affordable units are exempt from paying parkland dedication fees. Therefore, the project would pay $5,880,000 for the 98 proposed market rate units8.

Density Bonus
The project includes 24 below-market rate (BMR) units, or 20% of the total number of units proposed. As required by the City’s BMR Housing Program, 12 of the units will be allocated as affordable housing units for-sale to median-income households (80-100% of Area Median Income) and the other 12 units will be allocated as affordable for sale to moderate-income households (100-120% of Area Median Income). A condition of approval has been included to ensure the recordation of a regulatory agreement with the City, prior to occupancy, requiring the designated BMR units to be for-sale to households at the specified income levels for a 99-year term.

Density Bonus and Waiver Requests
The project is eligible for Density Bonus waivers and concessions consistent with the City of Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter (CMC) 19.56 Density Bonus and State Density Bonus Law.

The project includes requests for 12 waivers.
6 While this is not a current requirement, since this was a requirement at the time of submittal of the applicant’s SB 330 Preliminary Application, a Use Permit is required. None of the sites were identified as a Priority Housing Element in the 5th Cycle Housing Element. 7 Memorial Park is located 0.28 miles to the west and Faria Elementary School Field is located 0.22 miles southwest of the project site.
8 Due to the SB 330 nature of the project, the Park Fees payable are those in effect as of April 2024. 197
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
197 of 2882
10 Section 19.56.070 of the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance (“Findings") requires that, before approving an application which includes a request for a density bonus, waivers, or reduction in parking standards, the decision-making body must determine that the proposal is consistent with State Density Bonus Law by making the following findings9, as applicable:

1. That the housing development is eligible for the density bonus being requested as well as any incentives or concessions, waivers or reductions in parking standards that are requested.

2. That the development standard(s) for which the waiver(s) are requested would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of the housing development with the density bonus and incentives or concessions permitted if a waiver was not requested.

The City may not deny a waiver of a development standard that would physically preclude the construction of the project as it is designed, unless it is found that the waiver or reduction would have a specific, adverse impact upon health or safety, for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact, or would have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources.

Parking
While the City’s Municipal Code (Chapter 19.124) requires townhome projects to provide 2.8 parking spaces per dwelling unit10, State Density Bonus Law provides its own parking ratios for qualifying projects. Specifically, the Density Bonus Law allows qualifying projects to provide parking at a ratio of 1 parking space per studio to one-bedroom unit; 1.5 parking spaces per twoor three-bedroom unit; and 2.5 parking spaces per four- or more-bedroom unit. No additional guest spaces are required under Density Bonus law provisions.

Unit Type Number
of Units Municipal Code State DensityBonus Law Provided Three Bedroom 42 84 63 84
Four Bedroom 80 160 200 160
Guest - 98 - 28
Total 122 342 263 272
As proposed by the applicant, each unit will include two enclosed garage spaces (244 total spaces), with 28 additional spaces for guests, for a total of 272 spaces onsite, when only 263 are required per state density bonus law.
9 Government Code Section 65915 (d)(4): The city, county, or city and county shall bear the burden of proof for the denial of a requested concession or incentive. 10 While under updated Municipal Code amendments adopted in conjunction with Housing Element updates, townhomes are required to provide only one parking space per unit, since the project is vested under SB 330 to standards in effect at the time the SB 330 preliminary application was submitted, the project much provide 2.8 parking spaces (2 enclosed and 0.8 guest). 198
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
198 of 2882
11 Waivers Requested
As a density bonus project, the applicant may submit proposals for an unlimited number of waivers, or reduction of development standards, that would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of the project as proposed/designed (Government Code Section 65915(e)). As previously noted, a city may not deny a proposed project based on the theory that another project, with a similar number of units, might be designed differently and accommodated without waivers of development standards.

The project requires 12 waivers as follows:

1. 45-Foot Height Limitation (HOC Specific Plan Section 1.01.030) The HOC Specific Plan requires that developments have a maximum height of 45 feet, as measured from the sidewalk to the top of a building’s cornice, parapet, or eave line of a peaked roof. The applicant has requested a waiver for a total of 30 buildings to increase the height allowed for 26 detached single-family dwellings (SFD) and four townhouse buildings as follows:

Single Family
Building No. Building Height
(feet) Building No. Building Height (feet)
Bldg. 1 50 Bldg. 34 49
Bldg. 5 49.3 Bldg. 38 50.5
Bldg. 7 48.8 Bldg. 39 48.8
Bldg. 8 47.1 Bldg. 41 49.2
Bldg. 11 45.4 Bldg. 45 47.6
Bldg. 12 47.1 Bldg. 46 48
Bldg. 17 50.1 Bldg. 49 46.4
Bldg. 18 48.5 Bldg. 50 47.5
Bldg. 23 47.8 Bldg. 52 46.9
Bldg. 24 47.9 Bldg. 55 48.8
Bldg. 27 46.7 Bldg. 57 48
Bldg. 28 47.6 Bldg. 60 49.4
Bldg. 31 47.4 Bldg. 61 45.2
Bldg. 32 48.7 Bldg. 63 43.5
Bldg. 66 43.4
Townhome
Building No. Building Height
(feet) Building No. Building Height (feet)
Bldg. 6 46.8 Bldg. 1 44.6
Bldg. 7 45.8 Bldg. 2 44.8
Bldg. 4 46.3 Bldg. 3 44
Bldg. 5 45.1
199
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
199 of 2882
12 The other 40 detached SFDs buildings and three townhome buildings meet the height requirement of the HOC Specific Plan as proposed. The applicant states that imposing the 45- foot height restriction on the buildings for which waivers have been requested would result in changing the height and design of the buildings, including the potential removal of private open space in the form of rooftop decks, which is not consistent with the project as proposed.

2. Front Setback (HOC Specific Plan Section 1.01.030)
The HOC Specific Plan requires that developments have a minimum front setback of 35 feet from the edge of curb (nine feet from the required Boulevard Landscape Easement) while also allowing for the encroachment of uninhabitable building elements, such as chimneys and eaves, up to four feet into the required setback areas. The following table indicates the required setback and the proposed waiver for the two buildings for which waivers are requested.

Building Required Front Setback Proposed Front Setback
6 & 7 35’ from edge of curb 33’ from Bldg. to edge of curb The applicant states that imposing the front setback requirements would result in the elimination of units, reduced floor areas of units, or a substantial change to the design of the buildings, which is not consistent with the project as proposed.

3. Side Setbacks (HOC Specific Plan Section 1.01.030)
The HOC Specific Plan requires that developments have a minimum side setback of one-half of the height of the building, or ten feet, whichever is greater. It also allows for the encroachment of uninhabitable building elements, such as chimneys and eaves, up to three feet into the required setback areas. The following table indicates the required setback and the proposed waiver for the 15 buildings for which waivers are requested:

Detached SFD Bldgs. (Northern
end of Parcel, closer to Alves Dr.) Height Required SideSetback Proposed Side
Setback
1 50’ 25’ 9’-6”
38 50.5’ 25’-3” 9’-6”
39 48.8’ 24’-5” 8’-6”
11 45.4’ 22.7’ 8.5’
27 46.7’ 23.3’ 8.4’
28 47.6’ 23.8’ 8.4’
49 46.4’ 23.2’ 8.3’
50 47.5’ 23.7’ 8.1’
66 43.4’ 21.7’ 8’
Townhome Bldgs.
(Southern end of Parcel, closer to
Stevens Creek Blvd.)
Height Required Side
Setback Proposed Side
West: 2, 4, 6 50’-6” 25’-3” 10’
East: 3, 5, 7 50’-6” 25’-3” 6’
200
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
200 of 2882
13 The applicant states that imposing the side setback requirements would result in the elimination of units, reduced floor areas of units, or a substantial change to the design of the buildings, which is not consistent with the project as proposed.

4. Side-Yard Setback to Second Story Deck and Patio (CMC 19.36.070(E)(2) The Municipal Code 19.36.070(E)(2) requires a 15-foot side-yard setback for second story decks and patios. As shown in Exhibit 1, Sheet A0.15, application of this standard would result in the loss of fifteen units. Absent this waiver, the Project could not fit as many residential units, thereby physically precluding construction of the proposed development at the density and with the incentives and concessions permitted by the SDBL. (Gov. Code, § 65915(e)).

5. Rear Setback (HOC Specific Plan Section 1.01.030)
The HOC Specific Plan requires that developments have a minimum rear setback of one-andone-half of the height of the building, or 20 feet, whichever is greater. It also allows for the encroachment of uninhabitable building elements, such as chimneys and eaves, up to three feet into the required setback areas. The following table indicates the required setback and the proposed waiver for the eleven buildings for which waivers are requested:

Building Height Required Rear Setback Proposed Rear Setback 1 50’ 70’ 20’
2 39.8’ 59.7’ 20’
3 38.3’ 57.45’ 20’
4 38.1’ 57.15’ 20’
5 49.3’ 73.95’ 20’
6 37.2’ 55.8’ 20’
7 48.8’ 73.2’ 10’
8 47.1’ 70.65’ 20.6’
9 35.1’ 52.65’ 19.5’
10 35’ 52.5’ 18’
11 45.4’ 68.1’ 18’
The applicant states that imposing the rear setback requirement would result in the elimination of units, reduced floor areas of units, or a substantial change to the design of the buildings, which is not consistent with the project as proposed by the applicant.

6. Rear-Yard Setback to Second Story Deck and Patio (CMC § 19.36.070(E)(3)) The Municipal Code 19.36.070(E)(3) requires a 20-foot rear-yard setback for second story decks and patios. As shown on Exhibit 1, Sheet A0.14, application of this standard would result in the loss of five units. Absent this waiver, the Project could not fit as many residential units, thereby physically precluding construction of the proposed development at the density and with the incentives and concessions permitted by the SDBL. (Gov. Code, § 65915(e)). 201
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
201 of 2882
14 7. Building Forms (HOC Specific Plan Section 1.01.040) The HOC Specific Plan requires that buildings adjacent to residentially developed parcels be stepped back, or terraced, or have adequate setbacks so that privacy is maintained. It also requires that buildings requiring terracing shall have a 1.5:1 setback to height ratio. The proposal includes eleven buildings (Buildings 1-3, 17, 18 & 36-41) located adjacent to residential use to the west. While the project has been designed to address potential privacy concerns through building orientation and landscape screening, it does not meet the HOC Specific Plan’s required side setback and is therefore not consistent with this requirement.

The applicant has requested a waiver to allow for a reduced side setback and waiver of requirements for step backs for Buildings 1, 2, 17, 18 & 37-40.

Like the preceding required setback waivers, the applicant states that imposing the building form requirement would result in the elimination of units, reduced floor areas of units, or a substantial change to the design of the buildings, which is not consistent with the project proposed by the applicant.

8. Contextual Roof Plans and Setbacks (HOC Specific Plan 1.01.030 (C)(3)) The HOC Specific Plan allows building eaves to encroach up to three feet into setbacks. Eaves at front, side and rear setbacks encroach further than three feet into required setbacks. As shown on Exhibit 1, Sheet A0.18, compliance with this standard would result in the loss of thirty residential units. Absent this waiver, the project could not fit as many residential units, thereby physically precluding construction of the proposed development at the density and with the incentives and concessions permitted by the SDBL. (Gov. Code, § 65915(e)).

9. Maximum Lot Coverage (CMC Section 19.36.070 (A))
The Municipal Code requires that a development subject to the requirements of the R-3 zoning district has a maximum lot coverage of 40% of the net lot area. The proposed project has a net lot area of 6.84 acres, or 297,950 square feet, and would be allowed to have a maximum lot coverage of 119,180 square feet under Section 19.36.070 (A). The applicant has, therefore, requested a waiver to increase the lot coverage allowed for the project to accommodate a total lot coverage of 44% of the net lot area, or 131,197 square feet of building or surface area.

Imposing the 40% lot coverage restriction would result in changing the design of the buildings, including the potential reduction in the size and number of units, which is not consistent with the project as proposed by the applicant.

10. Minimum Lot Width CMC Table 19.36.060(C)
The Applicant seeks a waiver of the 70-foot minimum lot width at the front building line per CMC Table 19.36.060(C). As shown on Exhibit 1, Sheet A0.13, application of this standard would result in the loss of six units, thereby physically precluding construction of the proposed development at the density and with the incentives and concessions permitted by the SDBL.

11. Minimum Parking Space Size & Tandem Garages (CMC Section 19.124.040(A)) The Municipal Code (as of April 2024) requires that parking spaces in multiple-family developments have a 202
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
202 of 2882
15 minimum parking space size of 10 feet by 20 feet. The applicant has requested a waiver to modify this requirement to reduce the minimum parking garage dimensions for 17 units to

18.4 feet by 20 feet. Furthermore, 28 of the units are proposing tandem parking where townhomes are required to provide the standard 20 feet by 20 feet parking garage.

Imposing the parking space requirement would result in changing the size and design of the buildings, including the potential increase in the project coverage, reduction in open space, or potentially the number of units which is not consistent with the project as proposed by the applicant.

12. Parking Setback (CMC Table 19.36.070(J))
The Municipal Code restricts parking within a setback area where the lot adjoins property zoned (R-1) single-family. The applicant has requested a waiver to this standard to allow parking within the private garages of buildings 1, 2, 3, and 17 as these structures fall within the minimum side setback that adjoins property zoned (R-1) single-family.

Imposing the parking restriction would result in the loss of four units.

Concession Requested
As a density bonus project with at least 20% of units reserved for sale to moderate-income households11, the applicant may submit to the City requests for up to one concession. Concessions allow an applicant to deviate from development regulations when such regulations have the potential to make the project economically infeasible to build. The applicant has requested one concessions as follows:

1. BMR Housing Mitigation Program Procedural Manual Section 2.3.4 The Applicant requests a concession from BMR Housing Mitigation Program Procedural Manual Section 2.3.4 to the extent it would require the Project’s affordable unit type to include four-bedroom units.

Compliance with BMR Unit Comparability & Dispersion Requirements The BMR Manual requires that the BMR Units:
 Shall be comparable to market-rate units in terms of unit type, number of bedrooms per unit, quality of exterior appearance and overall quality of construction.  Size should be generally representative of the unit sizes within the market-rate portion of residential project.
 Interior features and finishes in affordable units shall be durable, of good quality and consistent with contemporary standards for new housing.

The following table demonstrates the proposed units within the development buildings by income level, type, and size:
11 The project proposes a mix of moderate- and median-income units, as required by the City’s BMR standards. State law does not specify allowances for median-income units, however, median-income units have a higher income restriction than moderate-income units and are therefore counted towards the moderate-income unit total for the purposes of concession allowances. 203
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
203 of 2882
16 Number of Units Number of Bedrooms Average Unit Size BMR Units
Townhouse Units
14 3 2,272 square feet
10 3 2,475 square feet
Market-Rate
Townhouse Units
4 3 2,475 square feet
14 3 2,603 square feet
14 4 3,697 square feet
Market-Rate
Detached-SFD 66 4 3,328 square feet
The Applicant requests a concession from BMR Housing Mitigation Program Procedural Manual Section 2.3.4 to the extent it would require the project’s affordable units to include four-bedroom units. The applicant has assessed and determined that the construction of four-bedroom units has an increased construction cost and an increased sales price subsidy compared to three-bedroom units. Therefore, the requested concession would result in actual cost savings by resulting in lower construction costs and decreased subsidies. The affordable units would be included in the townhome product type because the proposed density bonus project only includes four-bedroom detached units. Consistent with BMR Manual 2.3.4, after accounting for the requested concession, the affordable units would be dispersed through all seven townhouse buildings and comparable through the portions of the Project including three-bedroom units.

Additionally, there is no indication on the plans that the exterior finishes of the BMR units will be any different from the market rate units. As such, it is expected that they will be of the same quality; however, as allowed in the BMR manual, the affordable units may have different interior finishes.

No Net Loss Discussion (SB166)
California Government Code Section 65863 (No Net Loss Law) requires cities to ensure development opportunities remain available to accommodate the City’s regional housing need allocation (RHNA), especially for lower- and moderate- income households by maintaining adequate sites to accommodate the unmet RHNA for each income category. Through the 6th Cycle Housing Element’s adoption in May 2024, the City designated new Priority Housing Sites, which are anticipated to provide the units to meet the City’s RHNA for each income category. The City estimated the number of units, by income category, that are expected to be developed on each of these sites, resulting in the estimated unit counts shown in the table below. As noted previously, one of the four parcels (APN 326-32-050) that make up this project site is listed as a Priority Housing Site (Site 9) in the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element. While the project site is not subject to the land use and housing density requirements established through the adoption of the 6th Cycle Housing Element (see SB 330 discussion above), the City is nonetheless required to evaluate the project’s impacts on expected housing production under Government Code Section 65863.

Under No Net Loss Law, at the time of a project’s approval, the decision-making body must make the following findings:

1. That the remaining sites identified in the Housing Element are adequate to meet the jurisdiction’s remaining RHNA for the planning period, by income category. 204
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
204 of 2882
17 2. A quantification of the remaining unmet need for the jurisdiction’s RHNA at each income level and the remaining capacity of sites identified in the Housing Element, to accommodate that need by income level.

In the event the City is unable to make the findings of No Net Loss, the City must either concurrently with, or within 180 days of approval of a housing development project at a lower density or different mix of housing affordability, identify another Priority Housing Site(s) or increase the density of an existing Priority Housing Site(s) to ensure that adequate sites are available to accommodate its RHNA.

The table below quantifies the remaining unmet need for the 6th Cycle Housing Element 2023- 2031 RHNA, by income level, and the remaining capacity across all Priority Housing Sites by comparing the projected number of units for this Priority Housing Site with the actual number of units proposed by the subject project.

Income Category
Lower Income
(30-80% AMI)*
Moderate (80-
120% AMI)
Above
Moderate
(>120% AMI)
6th Cycle RHNA Requirement 1,880 755 1,953
Units Projected – all Sites 2,037 847 2,997
Projected Surplus – all Sites 157 92 1,044
Approved Projects*
Projected 756 153 1,535
Actual 272 39 1,299
Change -484 -114 -236
Unmet 6th Cycle RHNA before project 1,608 716 654
Overall Units Projected before project 1,281 694 1,462
Overall Surplus/deficit before project -327 -22 808
Stevens Creek Office Center
(Partial) (Priority Housing
Element Site 9)
Projected 21 8 22
Proposed 0 10 14
Change -21 +2 -8
Unmet 6th Cycle RHNA after project 1,608 706 640
Remaining Units Projected after project 1,260 686 1,440 Total Remaining Surplus after project -348 -20 800
* Approved projects include – SummerHill (Fontana’s, etc.); Toll Brothers (United Furniture); Dividend Homes I & II (Partial); Mary Avenue Villas (Charities Housing); Vallco Town Center/The Rise; and SummerHill Evulich.

As indicated in the table, the City will not be able to make the findings of No Net Loss with the approval of this project. The Housing Element estimated eight Moderate (the ”Moderate” designation, as used in the Housing Element, includes both Moderate- and Median-income units) units and 21 Lower-income units would be developed on Priority Housing Site 9. While a total of 24 Moderate and zero Lower Income units are proposed with the project, meeting the requirements of the City’s BMR Housing Mitigation Manual and allowing the project to utilize 205
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
205 of 2882
18 SDBL, only ten of the Moderate-income units are located on Site 9. The remaining 14 units proposed on Site 9 are Above-moderate income units. This results in a further deficit of 21 Lowerincome units and an increase of two Moderate-income units, as shown in the table below. With the proposed project, the City remains unable to make the findings for No Net Loss and will continue the separate process of identifying additional Priority Housing Sites.

Other Department/Agency Review
The City’s Building Division, Public Works Department, Environmental Services Division, Sheriff’s Department, Cupertino Sanitary District, and the Santa Clara County Fire Department have reviewed and conditioned the project.

Environmental Review
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
The applicantrequested that the development be reviewed in accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 130, signed into law on June 30, 2025, and codified in Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.66. This law exempts qualifying infill housing development from CEQA review, creating a new statutory exemption. This exemption applies to any required permits, entitlements, or other discretionary approvals for a broad range of housing types. The attached CEQA Exemption Memorandum (Attachment 7) demonstrates that the proposed project meets the requirements of PRC Section 21080.66 and is organized as follows:
 Infill Criteria. The project’s consistency with the allowed housing development type defined in PRC Section 21080.66(a), subdivisions (1) through (5) and (8).  Environmental Criteria. The project’s consistency with the individual environmental requirements pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(a), subdivisions (6) and (7).  Tribal Cultural Resources. The project’s consistency with the tribal notification and outreach requirements pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(b).  Hazardous Materials. The project’s consistency with the requirements for the identification and treatment of hazardous materials pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(c).
 Other Requirements. The project’s consistency with the Labor Code requirements and eligibility of a housing development project for a density bonus, incentives or concessions, waivers or reductions of development standards, and reduced parking ratios pursuant to PRC Sections 21080.66(d) and (e), respectively.

As analyzed in Section 3.2 of the attached CEQA Exemption Memorandum, Public Resources Code Section 21080.66, the proposed project meets the criteria for statutory exemption.

Accordingly, this document finds that a Notice of Exemption is appropriate for the proposed project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15062.

Planning Commission Review
On March 24, 2026, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing regarding the proposed project. After a discussion of several project issues, including the number and type of Density Bonus waivers requested, the reduction in the number of onsite trees, loss of retail and relocation options for the existing tenants, issues related to an existing access easement with an adjoining property, and other topics, all Commissioners supported the project as proposed. Commissioner 206
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
206 of 2882
19 Lindskog moved, seconded by Commissioner Fung, to adopt resolutions to approve the project with no modifications to the conditions or to the recommendations; however, the motion did include a recommendation to City Council to explore additional benefits or assistance options for retail tenants that will be displaced due to this housing development and similar projects. The Commission requested Council consider items such as expedited permitting processes, consideration of reduced fees, and other opportunities for assistance for businesses impacted by seeking relocation. The motion was passed by a 5-0 vote.

Prior to the Commission’s vote on the matter, the Commission received comments from six members of the public regarding several issues. The primary topic of concern was the loss of retail uses. Representatives of the retail space Voyager Coffee spoke on behalf of their business and said that while the landlord has offered relocation assistance, they were disappointed to have to look for an alternate location and expressed a desire to remain in Cupertino. Other speakers appreciated aspects of the proposed project’s design, such as the architecture design and the central common green space. One speaker spoke in favor of the need for additional housing in the community.

Planning Commission requested additional information about staff outreach efforts to on-site retail tenants.

Outreach to Retail tenants
To date, outreach to the retail tenants has included business visits, letters, phone calls, and emails.

Voyager Craft Coffee expressed interest in remaining in Cupertino and staff held two separate conversations with the business representatives. Staff is currently assisting the business in identifying potential retail sites within the city that are available or will soon become available.

Staff has also provided permitting support to Voyager Craft Coffee in May 2025 and July 2025.

The city is also working with the developer to understand and identify support for the retail tenants.

Panera Bread has not responded to staff outreach despite multiple attempts. Staff reached out through several channels, including contacting the company’s headquarters in St. Louis, Missouri, the district manager for the Cupertino-area locations, the store manager/supervisor for the Cupertino location, and the contact information listed on their business license. Additionally, as part of the City’s business outreach program, staff conducted site visits to the project site in December 2025, January 2026, and March 2026 and shared resources and upcoming business events with the retail tenants.

Public Outreach and Noticing
The following table is a summary of the noticing done for this project:

Notice of Public Hearing, Site Notice & Legal
Ad
Agenda
 Site Signage (14 days prior to the hearing)  Posted on the City’s official notice bulletin board (five days prior to the hearing)
207
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
207 of 2882
20 Notice of Public Hearing, Site Notice & Legal
Ad
Agenda
 Legal ad placed in newspaper (at least 10
days prior to the hearing)
 Posted on the City of Cupertino’s website
(five days prior to the hearing)
 Public hearing notices were mailed to
property owners within 500 feet of the
project site (10 days prior to the hearing)
The applicant completed community outreach to residents and property owners on March 20, 2025.

Public Comment
Several comments were received related to the project, which are attached as Attachment 8. Three of the letters were in support of the project, while four letters were not in support of the project due to the continued loss of retail uses in the community. Two letters, from the adjacent retail shopping center, requested modification to the Easement Agreement for the shared driveway and access to an existing trash enclosure. No additional letters were received prior to the preparation of this report. The City is unable to make findings to deny the proposed project. A condition of approval is already in the draft resolutions to address a continued ingress/egress easement on the southeast corner of the project site. The remainder of the issues raised may be resolved by the two parties at a later date.

Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the project, as proposed, because the project and its conditions of approval support the findings for approval of the proposed project, consistent with Chapters 14.18, 18.28, 19.56, 19.156, and 19.168 of the Cupertino Municipal Code.

Sustainability Impact
The project was reviewed by the Sustainability Division and the applicant completed the required Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist. The project has been found to be exempt from CEQA through a Statutory Exemption and therefore it is expected that there will be no sustainability impact.

Fiscal Impact
No fiscal impact.

City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description
None
Council Goal:

Housing.

California Environmental Quality Act
208
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
208 of 2882
21 As discussed in the Background section of this report, the project is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.66.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Shelby Maples, Senior Planner
Reviewed by: Luke Connolly, Assistant Director of Community Development Benjamin Fu, Director of Community Development
Floy Andrews, Interim City Attorney
Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager
Attachments:

A – Draft Resolution for U-2024-008
B – Draft Resolution for ASA-2024-011
C – Draft Resolution for TM-2024-006
D – Draft Resolution for TR-2024-033
E – Summary of Relevant State Law
F – Arborist Report and Peer Review
G – CEQA Exemption and Memorandum
H – Public Comment
I – Project Site Plan and Renderings
J - Complete Plan Set
209
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
209 of 2882
RESOLUTION NO. 26-___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL

APPROVING A USE PERMIT FOR A NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CONSISTING OF 56-TOWNHOME-CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND 66 SMALL LOT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, ON FOUR CONTIGUOUS
PARCELS TOTALING 6.93-ACRES, INCLUDING TREE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENTS LOCATED AT 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 STEVENS CREEK BLVD; APNs: 326-32-050, -051, -052, & -053
SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application No.: U-2024-008
Applicant: Kevin Choy (Harvest Properties)
Property Owner: Blair Volckmann
Location: 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd; APNs: 326-32- 050, -051, -052, and -053
SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR A USE PERMIT:

WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use Permit as described in Section I of this resolution; and
WHEREAS, the project is determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines because the proposed project would meet the requirements of the Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.66(a); and
WHEREAS, on March 24, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to receive staff’s presentation and public testimony, and to consider the information contained in the Exemption Memorandum along with all staff reports, other pertinent documents, and all written and oral statements received prior to and at the public hearing; and
WHEREAS, on March 24, 2026 the Planning Commission recommended on a 5-0 vote that the City Council approve the Use Permit (U-2024-008) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-11), approve the Architectural and Site Approval Permit (ASA-2024-011) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-12), approve the Vesting Tentative Map (TM-2024-006) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-13), and approve the Tree Removal Permit (TR-2024-033), in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-14); and
210
CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet
210 of 2882
Resolution No. 26-___