HC Resolution No. 15-01 Recommending Adoption of the 2014-2022 Housing ElementCITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, California 95014
RESOLUTION NO. 15-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RECOMMENDING
ADOPTION OF THE 2014-2022 HOUSING ELEMENT
SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION
Application No: GPA-2013-02
Applicant: Ciiy of Cupertino
Location: Citywide
SECTION II: RECITALS
WHEREAS, pursuant to State Housing Law, the City Council has directed staff to update the
Housing Element of the General Plan to comply with State Law; and
WHEREAS, on December 4, 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 211, adopting a
General Plan Amendment (Application No. GPA-2013-01) covering the properties which are
the subject of this Housing Element and authorized submittal of a Draft Housing Element and
Technical Appendix to the California Department of Housing and Community Dgvelopment
HCD"); and
WHEREAS, by letter dated February 5, 2015, HCD found that the Draft Housing Element and
Housing Element Technical Report meet the statutory requirements of State housing element
law; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Element is consistent with the City's General Plan land use map,
proposed uses and surrounding uses; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Element is part of the General Plan Amendment, Housing Element
Update and Associated Rezoning project, all as fully described and analyzed in the General
Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning Project Final
Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") (State Clearinghouse No. 2014032007); and
WHEREAS, on December 4, 2014, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 14-210 certifying the
EIR, adopting Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, adopting Mitigation
Measures, and adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and
WHEREAS, there have been no substantial changes in the Housing Element, no substantial
changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Housing Element would be
undertaken, and no discovery of new information of substantial importance that would
require major revisions to the EIR due to new or substantially more severe significant
environmental effects; and
394\10\1660107.1
2/18/2015
GPA-2013-02 2014-2022 Housing Element February 26,2015
Page 2
WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given as required by the procedural
ordinances of the City of Cupertino and the Government Code, and the Housing Commission
held a public hearing on February 26,2015 to consider the project.
l TOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVEI:
After careful consideration of the, maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence
submitted in this matter, the Housing Commission recommends that the City Council
adopt the Housing Element and Housing Element Technical Report Update 2014—2022
attached hereto.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 26t'' day of February 2015, at a Meeting of the Housing
Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
Aarti Shrivastava Shirley Chu
Director of Community Development Chair,Housing Commission
Chu, Barnett, Wilson, Maroko, Raman
None
None
None
xrll i i
I"
i 6 ,; .
w-'»,,,,,,,,,._
d ...
i, s
tf;'
e,, t
r#.; ;'''`' ";; ,
t .
R.
r
J3
A'S
s`.
i d. . , .. .
j
3' 1'-' ;
x,
lyl
C..`
F
S f•
i p
S
t
i;
115 5 r
a i
zp
x:3 ta ; R_
y'i 1
V' '-:
3
r
iiw': ' ;i z eJ
YJ .• i` tA r
i'
ti,- ti"i
W',
s
c' t o >' -
1 ;,y 2 1
e .,
f"
J' J . e,r: / _ —
c .,
r 4 d
T
i ` '
Y
s , '+
r /
i';''.*. x: .
j
k 'TJ r'r,;' :l 4e'
f' J ".t "' t'
fi } + .•1
y'
x
f S.
M«
Y L
Y ) ,+ `r7'pL`y .. .
J I
S v.' l+t
R 1!
I
1 ` Xri. -.y 9.
sr yZ- 1 ..". ,•
i
q .M
r y
1;-
l, .. t
r A', . ; , ::
1 J ...K 7 1^' 1
r ,,a4i ^- ,f*'.: " '"fM,
L. y. * tt ^ ; f'.` '' / i
y X ,
e r, ..,.. 7 - ,.j
ri' .
t'
s!,'
1'
i'' "
i` `"4`
w.' _+ , `:f 6-, ' a
h
q,
iR;
r $; ,". _
1' +Y;iai'? ie''. tf • , `'j' ..
w—w " '• "Fi' t y
ti'-, '
fk' r Y:, r r't 'v`j, / x'
r •
x .
y}
z ~ i
t;
a
l'
i.
y
9.•
sro
a.
4 ' ,
F
pqr, ..`
r y,;1 ,', ,
z ., 4 r
t
h
t
9_+1C.1 ._s r+i: ' ' ae1. + s
w''r . .. .'`.``''P''t°
t.,'"
l...,I 1,4.
HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
I TRC)L3 3 T0
a
Cupertino is a community with a high quality of life, a
renowned school system, and a robust high-technology
economy. The long term vitality of Cupertino and the
local economy depend upon the availability of all types of
housing to meet the community's diverse housing needs.
As Cupertino looks towards the future, increasing the range
and diversity of housing options will be integral to the
City's success. Consistent with the goal of being a balanced
community, this Housing Element continues the City's
commitment to ensuring new opportunities for residential
development, as well as for preserving and enhancing our
existing neighborhoods.
Role and Content of Housing Element
The Housing Element is a comprehensive eight-year plan to
address housing needs in Cupertino. This updated Housing
Element focuses on housing needs from January 31, 2015
through January 31, 2023, in accordance with the housing
element planning period established by State law for San
Francisco Bay Area jurisdictions.
This Housing Element is the City's primary policy document
regarding the development, rehabilitation, and preservation
of housing for all economic segments of the population.
Per State Housing Element law, the document must be
periodically updated to:
Outline the community's housing production objectives
consistent with State and regional growth projections
Describe goals, policies and implementation strategies to
achieve local housing objectives
Examine the local need for housing with a focus on
special needs populations
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E-3
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
Identify adequate sites for the production of housing
serving various income levels
j 4
Analyze potential constraints to new housing production
I
Evaluate the Housing Element for consistency with other
General Plan elements
i f ,
y,
1" This element outlines the community's projected housing
needs and defines the actions the City will take to
rt,,,... ._.,...-,
a
address them. General Plan Appendix B provides detailed
background information to meet all requirements of State
Housing Element law.
J y `' .'., ,
3 r " 't;r C il.'"c' ,,
This section describes the demographic, housing, and
economic conditions in Cupertino; assesses the demand
a- --'"°
m= for housing for households at all income levels; and
The Hous ng iVeeds Assessment establishes documents the demand for housing to serve special needs
the tramework for defining the City's populations. The Housing Needs Assessment establishes
housing goals and needs
the framework for defining the City's housing goals and
formulating policies and strategies that address local
housing needs.
A community's population characteristics can affect the
amount and type of housing needed. Factors such as
population growth, household type, and whether or not
households are more likely to rent or buy their homes
influence the type of housing needed.
H E-4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
Demographic Trends in Cupertino and the
Region
Population r
i...
Y:7,. ., .:os-L
The City's population increased by 15 percent between r =a ` "''-
T . ._._.._._.. -
2000 and 2010, exceeding the growth rate of Santa Clara
4'
t
County (six percent), the San Francisco Bay area (five t
percent), and the State of California (10 percent) (see
J
Table HE-1). During this period, Cupertino grew from
The Gty's population increase has
50,546 to 58,302 residents. A portion of this population placed nefi pressures on Cupertino's
growth can be attributed to the annexation of 168 acres neighborhoods
of land between 2000 and 2008. Annexation of Garden
Gate, Monta Vista, and scattered County "islands" added
1,600 new residents. After removing the population
increases from these annexations, Cupertino experienced
a 12-percent increase in its population during the previous
decade.
Households
A household is defined as a person or group of persons
living in a housing unit, as opposed to persons living in
group quarters, such as dormitories, convalescent homes,
or prisons. In 2010, Cupertino was home to 20,181
households (see Table HE-1). The City added approximately
2,000 new households between 2000 and 2010, an increase
of 11 percent. Approximately 600 of these households,
however, resulted from annexations. After adjusting for
household increases due to annexation, the number of
households grew by only eight percent between 2000
and 2010. During the same time period, the number of
households increased by 6.8 percent in Santa Clara County.
Household Typ
Households are divided into two different types, depending
on their composition. Family households are those
consisting of two or more related persons living together.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUS NG ELEMENT H E-S
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
Non-family households include persons who live alone
t
or in groups of unrelated individuals. Cupertino has a
large proportion of family households. In 2011, family
n` households comprised 77 percent of all households in
the City, compared with 71 percent of Santa Clara County
r `! t '
households (see Table HE-1).
T 1 . ..` i .
r
I
e : "' . , Household Tenure
a _ . r I F.
R' :
r
i d'. ... • t y n"`.4''w
r:r„y ouset,o ds a e rh argesr Households in Cupertino are more likely to own than
proport ons of hauseholci type in Cupertino rent their homes. Approximately 63 percent of Cupertino
households owned their homes in 2010. By comparison, 58
percent of Santa Clara County households owned homes
see Table HE-1).
Long-term Projections
Table HE-2 on page HE-7 shows population, household,
and job growth projections for Cupertino, Santa Clara
County, and the nine-county Bay Area region between 2010
and 2040 and represents the analysis conducted by the
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) using 2010
Census data and a variety of local sources.
Between 2010 and 2040, Cupertino's population is
expected to grow by 12,898 residents—from 58,302 to
71,200. This translates into an increase of 22 percent over
30 years. ABAG projects both Santa Clara County and the
ABAG region will experience much larger growth over the
same time period (36 percent and 31 percent, respectively).
Cupertino's job growth is expected to continue to outpace
population and household growth between 2010 and 2020,
compounding the "jobs rich" nature of the City and the
region. By 2020, Cupertino is anticipated to have a jobs-to-
housing ratio of 1.40 (up from 1.29 in 2010, but mirroring
the regional average of 1.40). Job growth in Cupertino is
projected to level off after 2020 to a comparable pace with
population and household growth. Similar trends are also
projected for the County and the ABAG region as a whole.
H E-6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Hous ng Eiemert
i "' , i 1 i 1 ! i ! 1 1
r-.; . ._,:,: .-,. . ..,.... - _.-... ..,,
FR
N
iGi`,j.+.?`a1 i3 i ilt'•_t_'_.,a tY
City of Cupertino
Population 50,546 58,302 7,756 15.3%
Households 18,204 20,181 1,977 10.9%
Average Household Size(a) 2.75 2.83
Household Type(a)
Families 74.8% 77.4%
Non-Families 25.2% 22.6%
Tenure
Owner 63.6% 62.6%
Renter 36.4% 37.4%
Santa ClaratGc un,!
Population 1,682,585 1,781,642 99,057 5.9%
Households 565,863 604,204 38,341 6.8%
Average Household Size(a) 2.92 2.89
Household Type(a)
Families 69.9% 70.8%
Non-Families 30.1% 29.2%
Tenure
Owner 59.8% 57.6%
Renter 40.2% 42.4%
Bay Area(b)
Population 6,783,760 7,150,739 366,979 5.4%
Households 2,466,019 2,608,023 142,004 5.8%
Average Household Size(a) 2.69 2.69
Household Type(a)
Families 64.7% 64.8%
Non-Families 35.3% 35.2%
Tenure
Owner 57.7% 56.2%
Renter 42.3% 43.8%
Califomia
Population 33,871,648 37,253,956 3,382,308 10.0%
Households 11,502,870 12,577,498 1,074,628 9.3%
Average Household Size(a) 2.87 2.91
Household Type(a)
Families 68.9% 68.6%
Non-Families 31.1% 31.4%
Tenure
Owner 56.9% 55.9%
Renter 43.1% 44.1%
Notes:
a)Average household size and household type figures from American Community Survey(ACS), 2007-2011.
b)Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma Counties.
Source:Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E • 7
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
Housing Stock Characteristics
4 3.4,'' };,`i'^4 K;'
t A community's housing stock is defined as the collectionr.S' "
i'y';<' . ,
x.Y 2,i..n..c.,3,*__ .
y' of all types of housing located within the jurisdiction. Thed ,y,G. . y Y'..1M.: :,{ r,
FY
r„ :,., "c 4t= characteristics of the housing stock-including condition,
r:' w- ""S' ' ''-rt' :.:..:1f'14'.fi Lir.-;.:_.f . ,n L'+.' :_
ii '#y^
r;, h, --- '.t r; type, and affordability-are important in determining the7 `'- ,..
housing needs for Cupertino.
a
t ' i J Y.
M -
1__'-
v -a istribution of Units by Structure Type
The population of Cupertino 5 ypz G
A majority of housing units in Cupertino are single-to increase by twenty-two percent over the
next thirty years family detached homes (57 percent in 2013). While still
representing the majority house type, this represents a
decrease from 2000, when 61 percent of all homes were
single-family detached. In comparison, single-family
detached homes in both Santa Clara County and the Bay
Area comprised 54 percent of all homes in 2013.
Large multi-family buildings (defined as units in structures
containing five or more dwellings) represent the second
1 1 /
t
t
w y.,:. .. yy,F.L-_.._. .... .
at'aE r3n'
2 ,j ,
a + '
4-,.:
City of Cupertino
Population 58,302 62,100 66,300 71,200 6.5% 6.8% 7.4%
Households 20,181 21,460 22,750 24,040 6.3% 6.0% 5.7%
Jobs 26,090 29,960 31,220 33,110 14.8% 4.2% 6.1%
Santa Clara County
Population 1,781,642 1,977,900 2,188,500 2,423,500 11.0% 10.6% 10.7%
Households 604,204 675,670 747,070 818,400 11.8% 10.6% 9.5%
Jobs 926,270 1,091,270 1,147,020 1,229,520 17.8% 5.1% 7.2%
Bay Area (a)
Population 6,432,288 7,011,700 7,660,700 8,394,700 9.0% 9.3% 9.6%
Households 2,350,186 2,560,480 2,776,640 2,992,990 8.9% 8.4% 7.8%
Jobs 3,040,110 3,579,600 3,775,080 4,060,160 17.7% 5.5% 7.6%
Notes:
a)Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma Counties. Source:Association of Bay Area
Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013.
H E-8 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
largest housing category in Cupertino (21 percent),
followed by single-family attached dwellings (12 percent).
Between 2000 and 2013, these two housing types
R
experienced an increase of 24 and 26 percent, respectively.
a' *':
T1 -p ..
I.K..
Market Conditions and Income Related to " =- ` - - ` r
r.: '. Housing Costs R, , ``s..; -s
i `.I .; ,. ,
The cost of housing is dependent on a variety of factors,
including underlying land costs, market characteristics,
r
I he hay Area technoiog;i boom nas
and financing options. In the Bay Area, the technology increased housing demand at all levels
boom has increased the demand for new housing at all
income levels, resulting in both lower-earning residents
and well-paid area professionals competing for housing
in an overcrowded and expensive market. High housing
costs can price lower-income families out of the market,
cause extreme cost burdens, or force households into
overcrowded conditions. Cupertino has some of the highest
housing costs in the region.
Rental Market Characteristics and Trends
A review of rental market conditions in Cupertino was
conducted for this Housing Element by reviewing
advertised apartment listings. The survey found that
market-rate rents averaged:
1,608 per month for studio units
2,237 per month for one-bedroom units
2,886 per month for two-bedroom units
3,652 per month for three-bedroom units
Rental prices in Cupertino ranged from $1,400 for a studio
unit to $5,895 for a five-bedroom unit. As can be expected,
smaller units are generally more affordable than larger
units. The overall median rental price for all unit sizes
surveyed was $2,830, and the average price was $2,919.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E-9
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
Home Sale Trends
While other areas of the State and nation experienced
i ' `"" downturns in the housing market during the national
x s recession that began in 2008, Cupertino home values have
s
y.
HOl` t'% _; continued to grow. During the depth of the housing market
FOf F ' crash (between 2008 and 2010), the median home price in
S j
Cupertino held steady at around $1,000,000. Since 2011,
home prices in Cupertino have increased substantially. The
Despite t; national economic downturn, 2013 median home sales price of $1,200,000 in Cupertino
Cupertino ome values have continued to
r se was nearly double that of the County median price
645,000), and prices continued to rise in 2014.
Housing Affordability
According to the federal government, housing is
considered "affordable" if it costs no more than 30 percent
of a household's gross income. Often, affordable housing
is discussed in the context of affordability to households
with different income (evels. Households are categorized
as very low income, low income, moderate income, or
above moderate income based on percentages of the
area median income established annually by the California
Department of Housing and Community Development
HCD). In 2014, the area median income for Santa Clara
County was $105,500 for a family of four.
Special Housing Needs
Certain groups have more difficulty finding decent,
affordable housing due to their special circumstances.
Special circumstances may be related to one's income-
earning potential, family characteristics, the presence of
physical or mental disabilities, or age-related health issues.
As a result, certain groups typically earn lower incomes
and have higher rates of overpayment for housing, or they
may live in overcrowded residences. Housing Element law
specifically requires an analysis of the special housing needs
H E-1 0 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
of the elderly, the disabled, female-headed households,
large families, farmworkers, and homeless persons and
families. Table HE-3 summarizes demographics for these
special needs groups in Cupertino.
t
T.,. :,:,
y,,.. .,_-..
Senior-Headed Households 3,983 785 (19.7%) 3,198 (80.3%) 19.7%
Households with a Senior
5,069 n/a n/a 25.1%
Member
Seniors Living Alone 1,612 516 (32.0°/a) 1,096 (68.0%) 8.0%
Large Households 1,883 619 (32.9%) 1,264 (67.1%) 9.3%
Single-Parent Households 883 n/a n/a 4.4%
Female Single-Parent Households 667 n/a n/a 6.9%
Persons with Disabilities a 3,445 n/a n/a 5.9%
Agricultural Workers b 36 n/a n/a 1%
Persons living in Poverty b 2,330 n/a n/a 4.0%
Homeless 112 n/a n/a 1%
Notes:
a)2010 Census data not available for persons with disabilities. Estimate is from the 2008-2012 ACS. Estimate is for persons S years
of age and older.
b)2010 Census data not available. Estimate is from the 2007-2011 ACS.
c)2010 Census data not available. Estimate is from 2013 Santa Clara County Homeless Point-In-Time Census and Survey
Comprehensive Report. Of the 112 homeless persons counted in Cupertino in 2013, 92 persons were unsheltered and 20 were
sheltered.
Sources:Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013; U.S. Census,American
Community Survey(ACS),2008-2012;2013 Santa Clara County Homeless Point-In-7ime Census and Survey Comprehensive
Report
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E-1 1
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
x eniors
Y
Many senior residents face a unique set of housing needs,
largely due to physical limitations, fixed incomes, and
health care costs. Affordable housing cost, unit sizes and
T 4 "' accessibility to transit, family, health care, and other services
are critical housing concerns for seniors.
u
In 2010, 20 percent of Cupertino householders were 65
pe-r,;,o's zia iy rc r;o e,o ds are years old or older, slightly higher than the proportion of
more likely to be iower income than elderly senior households in Santa Clara County (18.5 percent).
o,Nner households A large majority of these senior households owned
their homes; 86 percent of elderly households were
homeowners, compared to only 58 percent of householders
under 64 years old.
Cupertino's elderly renter households are more likely
to be lower income than elderly owner households.
Approximately 62 percent of elderly renter households
earned less than 80 percent of the area median income
compared to 42 percent of senior homeowners. Elderly
households also tend to pay a larger portion of their
income on housing costs than do other households.
Large Households
Large households are defined as those with five or
more members. Large households are identified as a
special needs group because of limited opportunities for
adequately sized and affordable housing. Cupertino has
a smaller proportion of large households than Santa Clara
County as a whole (9.3 percent in Cupertino compared
to 15 percent in Santa Clara County). In the City, large
households are more likely to be homeowners (67 percent)
than renters (33 percent). Approximately 64 percent of the
housing units in Cupertino have three or more bedrooms
and can accommodate large households.
H E-1 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
Single-Parent Households
i4 `
JL u ti—
Single-parent households often require special r=ry'—
consideration and assistance because of their reater9
i.:,
need for affordable housing and accessible day care, k•
health care, and other supportive services. Female-headed
single-parent households with children, in particular, tend
to have a higher need for affordable housing than other
family households in general. In addition, these households a
are more likely to need childcare since the mother is often '
iu, s,yr,,n,r proporr o, o
Cupertino's 3.3 percent female-headed
the sole source of income in addition to being the sole si+lgle-parent households were living in
caregiver for the children in the household. In 2010, 667 Po eny
female-headed single-parent households with children
under 18 years of age lived in Cupertino, representing
3.3 percent of all households in the City. A significant
proportion of these households were living in poverty (21
percent).
Persons with Disabilities
A disability is a physical or mental impairment that limits
one or more major life activities. Persons with disabilities
generally have lower incomes and often face barriers to
finding employment or adequate housing due to physical
or structural obstacles. This segment of the population
often needs afFordable housing that is located near public
transportation, services, and shopping. Persons with
disabilities may require units equipped with wheelchair
accessibility or other special features that accommodate
physical or sensory limitations. Depending on the severity
of the disability, people may live independently with some
assistance in their own homes, or may require assisted
living and supportive services in special care facilities.
Approximately six percent of Cupertino residents and eight
percent of Santa Clara County residents had one or more
disabilities in 2010.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT Ff E-1 3
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
Residents Living Below the Poverty Leve)
s
F! .Families with incomes below the poverty level, specifically
a those with extremely low and very low incomes, are ati-
the reatest risk of becomin homeless and often re uirei } . y- g 9 q
s- assistance in meeting their rent and mortgage obligations
i in order to prevent homelessness. Census data suggest
t hat four percent o f a l l Cupertino resi dents were living
below the poverty level in 2010. Specifically, about three
s '`-`' y' -`" ''` `''", ,'''`"e percent of family households and two percent of families
for thousands of homeless peoplz and
families seeking assistance with children were living below the poverty level. These
households may require specific housing solutions such
as deeper income targeting for subsidies, housing with
supportive services, single-room occupancy units, or rent
subsidies and vouchers.
Homeless
Demand for emergency and transitional shelter in
Cupertino is difficult to determine given the episodic nature
of homelessness. Generally, episodes of homelessness
among families or individuals can occur as a single event
or periodically. The county-wide 2013 Santa Clara County
Homeless Census & Survey reported a point-in-time
count of 7,631 homeless people on the streets and in
emergency shelters, transitional housing, and domestic
violence shelters throughout the County. This estimate
includes 112 homeless individuals in Cupertino. The count,
however, should be considered conservative because many
unsheltered homeless individuals may not be visible at
street locations, even with the most thorough methodology.
k.€. it":.`7 .. r'°,
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65584,
the State, regional councils of government (in this case,
ABAG), and local governments must collectively determine
H E- 1 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
each locality's share of regional housing need (RHNA). In
conjunction with the State mandated housing element t ,' J.M
Sr.i. }
f, ' .•i'{ .
1 • "1
r''i'iY .
i ,{.:';` ,'update cycle that requires Bay Area jurisdictions to update
4 ,.;; =..,,
t,,;,;, • .
their elements by January 31, 2015, ABAG has determined r', ;;:;;, -'; . •'
housin unit roduction needs for each 'urisdiction within I r'
K
r A. • •
r
g P J F , .
I t r _*
the Bay Area. These allocations set housing production 4 yt x
goals for the planning period that runs from January 1,
r_- -''-
zy-,
2014 through October 31, 2022 (Table HE-4).o : ,
Y;
Low income housel olds may require
specific housing solutions due to a greater
risk for issues such as homelessness
1 1
f.. 4 r
4 .
Extremely LowNery Low(0-50% of AMI) 356 33.5%
Low (51-80% of AM I) 207 19.5%
Moderate (81-120% of AMI) 231 21.7%
Above Moderate (over 120% AMI) 270 25.4%
Total Units 1,064 100.0%
Source:ABAG Regional Housing Needs Assessment,2014.
Progress toward the Regional Housing Needs
Allocation
The City of Cupertino may count housing units constructed,
approved, or proposed since January 1, 2014 toward
satisfying its RHNA goals for this planning period. Between
January 1 and May 31, 2014, building permits for 14
single-family housing units and three second units were
approved in Cupertino. In addition, six single-family homes
and seven apartments received Planning approvals. Also
included in the RHNA credits are 32 second units projected
to be developed within the planning period. This projection
is based on historical approvals of second units during
the past Housing Element planning period. With these
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E- 1 5
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
V— Y credits, the City has a remaining RHNA of 1,002 units: 356
t extremely low/very low-income units, 207 low-income units,
196 moderate-income units, and 243 above moderate-
a'` income units.
q
z '".-,t,^
s. Vh.-.P-...
aA
W = OUSING RESOURCES
i i'- Overview of Available Sites for Housingy..:s; s
The purpose of the adequate sites analysis is to
nE H55o:a o-, o+ 3 y Area Govemments demonstrate that a sufficient supply of land exists in the
ABAG)nelps d termine eacn areas share of
the regionai housing need City to accommodate the fair share of the region's housing
needs during the RHNA projections period (January 1, 2014
October 31, 2022). The Government Code requires that
the Housing Element include an "inventory of land suitable
for residential development, including vacant sites and sites
having the potential for redevelopment" (Section 65583[a]
3]). It further requires that the element analyze zoning and
infrastructure on these sites to ensure housing development
is feasible during the planning period.
Figure HE-1 indicates the available residential development
opportunity sites to meet and exceed the identified
regional housing need pursuant to the RHNA. The
opportunity sites can accommodate infill development
of up to 1,400 residential units on properties zoned for
densities of 20 dwelling units to the acre or more. The
potential sites inventory is organized by geographic area
and in particular, by mixed use corridors. As shown in Table
HE-5, sites identified to meet the near-term development
potential lie within the North Vallco Park Special Area, the
Heart of the City Special Area, and the Vallco Shopping
District Special Area.
H E-1 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
Figure HE-1
Priority Housing Element Sites: Scenario A
Applicable if Valico Specific Plan is adopted by May 31,2018
If Vallco Specific Plan is not adopted by May 31,2018, the designated Priority Housing Element Sites will be as shown in General Plan
Appendix B, Section 5.5:Residential Sites Inventory-Scenario B.
North Vallco
Park:
600 Units
r \ unnyvale q
Los Altos
p,
a ,,,
1 I 1_.,_..•"_—.' . . _ s,.
t`1 tH oeons
t
o ,
Vallco
Sho m
a•.,.,
i PP 9
i District:
a o
i 389units
r
389 Units
C—.-.._,
i .____ ,:' t . Santa Clara
r'' ' ,
F '...
6
M Marina
A3:0 ks 700uni1s
f . ' J
200 nits
AS:Vxanl , 1
0 ,4 11 units ' ~
i
I
1
1 /'
Ip'
1 x
J !
1 1
st t 1
t 1
a_ ___-•..
e
rs m..
I F Heart of the
r San Jose C t y:
j i t 411 Units
E
i
a
E
ti `l:.J 1'
t^.,___
1
i i
r
a..
r .....
o..___ ....r
J t `
b`^,..i
Legend
City Boundary Housing Elements
Sites
Urban Service Area Boundary VTA Priority
Sphere of Influence Development Area
Boundary Agreement Line
PDA)
5i0e Site Number.Realistic
Unincor orated AreasP Capacity.No e:ae,r,r<
capaci y is generally 85%of
0 0.5 1Mile
m•mumuwc rya iowee
Special Areas
T
0 1000 2000 3000 Feet
Q Heart of the City05001000Me[ers
North Vallco Park
Vallco Shopping District
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E-1 7
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
One particular site will involve substantial coordination or
redevelopment (Vallco Shopping District, Site A2). Due to
the magnitude of the project, the City has established a
contingency plan to meet the RHNA if a Specific Plan is not
approved within three years of Housing Element adoption.
t This contingency plan (called Scenario B and discussed
Tf
z ;; further in General Plan Appendix B), would involve the City
i,.
removing Vallco Shopping District, adding more priority
sites to the inventory, and also increasing the density/
L.:if.J Ii')U l 3 ii;iC ::aliy ii- /1i0"c jOC:
then hous r,q allowable units on other priority sites.
a.,
Y¢ ` u. _. _ .,
i
High Density North 75 ft; or 60 ft in certain
Site A1 (The Hamptons)
P(Res) Vallco Park
85 locations*;
600 net
Site A2 (Vallco
RS/O/R Vallco height to be determined
P(Regional Shopping) Shopping 35 in Vallco Shopping 389
Shopping District) P(CG) District District Specific Plan
Site A3 (The Oaks C/R Heart of 45 ft
Shopping Center) P(CG, Res) the City
30 200
C/O/R Heart of
Site A4 (Marina Plaza) P(CG, Res) the City
35 45 ft 200
C/O/R Heart of
Site A5 (Barry Swenson) P(CG, Res) the City
25 45 ft 11
Total 1,400
Notes:Zoning for Site A2(Vallco)will be determined by Specific Plan to allow residential uses.Site A1 (Hamptons)height limit of 60 feet is
applicable for buildings located within 50 feet of property lines abutting Wolfe Rd, Pruneridge Ave.&Apple Campus 2 site. Site A2(Vallco)
height will be determined by Specific Plan. For more detail on height limits,see Land Use and Community Design Element, Figure LU-1.
FI E-1 8 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
HOUSING PLAN
This section presents the quantified objectives for new
housing unit construction, conservation, and rehabilitation
during the 2014-2022 projections period, as well as the
policies and strategies to meet these objectives and
address local housing needs. Policies and strategies are
grouped into the following goals:
Goal HE-1: An Adequate Supply of Residential Units for
all Economic Segments
Goal HE-2: Housing that is Affordable for a Diversity of
Cupertino Households
Goal HE-3: Enhanced Residential Neighborhoods
Goal HE-4: Energy and Water Conservation
Goal HE-5: Services for Extremely Low-Income
Households and Special Needs Neighborhoods
Goal HE-6: Equal Access to Housing Opportunities
Goal HE-7: Coordination with Regional Organizations and
Local School Districts
This section also identifies the responsible party and
timeline for each implementation strategy.
Quantified Objectives
Table HE-6 outlines the proposed housing production,
rehabilitation, and conservation objectives for the eight-year
Housing Element planning period.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT NOUSING ELEMENT H E-1 9
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
t :.
Extremely Low 178 10 8
Very Low 178 10
Low 207 20
Moderate 231
Above Moderate 270
Total 1,064 40 8
Source:City of Cupertino,2014
o
Policy HE-1.1: Provision of Adequate Capacity for
New Construttion Need
Designate sufficient land at appropriate densities to
accommodate Cupertino's Regional Housing Needs
Allocation of 1,064 units for the 2014-2022 projection
period.
Policy HE-1 .2: Housing Densities
Provide a full range of densities for ownership and rental
housing.
Policy HE-1 .3: Mixed Use DevelopmQnt
Encourage mixed-use development near transportation
facilities and employment centers.
H E-2 0 HCD REVIEVVED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
Implementing Strategies
Strategy 1: Land Use Policy and Zoning Provisions. To
accommodate the Regional Housing Needs Allocation
RHNA), the City will continue to:
Provide adequate capacity through the Land Use
Element and Zoning Ordinance to accommodate the
RHNA of 1,064 units while maintaining a balanced
land use plan that offers opportunities for employment
growth, commercial/retail activities, services, and
amenities.
Monitor development standards to ensure they are
adequate and appropriate to facilitate a range of housing
in the community
Monitor the sites inventory and make it available on the
City website.
Monitor development activity on the Housing
Opportunity Sites to ensure that the City maintains
sufficient land to accommodate the RHNA during the
planning period. In the event a housing site listed in the
Housing Element sites inventory is redeveloped with a
non-residential use or at a lower density than shown in
the Housing Element sites inventory, ensure that the City
has adequate capacity to meet the RHNA by making
the findings required by Government Code Section
65863 and identifying alternative site(s) within the City if
needed.
Priority Housing Sites: As part of the Housing Element
update, the City has identified five priority sites under
Scenario A (see Table HE-5) for residential development
over the next eight years. The General Plan and
zoning designations allow the densities shown in Table
HE-5 for all sites except the Vallco Shopping District
site (Site A2). The redevelopment of Vallco Shopping
HCD REVtEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT N E -2 1
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
District will involve significant planning and community
input. A specific plan will be required to implement
a comprehensive strategy for a retail/office/residential
mixed use development. The project applicant would
be required to work closely with the community and
the City to bring forth a specific plan that meets the
community's needs, with the anticipated adoption and
rezoning to occur within three years of the adoption
of the 2014-2022 Housing Element (by May 31, 2018).
The specific plan would permit 389 units by right at a
minimum density of 20 units per acre.
If the specific plan and rezoning are not adopted within
three years of Housing Element adoption (by May 31,
2018), the City will schedule hearings consistent with
Government Code Section 65863 to consider removing
Vallco as a priority housing site under Scenario A, to be
replaced by sites identified in Scenario B (see detailed
discussion and sites listing of "Scenario B" in Appendix
B - Housing Element Technical Appendix). As part of
the adoption of Scenario B, the City intends to add two
additional sites to the inventory: Glenbrook Apartments
and Homestead Lanes, along with increased number of
permitted units on The Hamptons and The Oaks sites.
Applicable zoning is in place for Glenbrook Apartments;
however the Homestead Lanes site would need to be
rezoned at that time to permit residential uses. Any
rezoning required will allow residential uses by right at a
minimum density of 20 units per acre.
H E-2 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
Cupertino Department of
Responsible Agencies: Community Development/
Planning Division
Ongoing; Adopt Specific Plan and ;
rezoning for Vallco by May 31, i
Time Frame: 2018; otherwise, conduct public
hearings to consider adoption of
Scenario B" of sites strategy. j
Funding Sources: None required
1,064 units (178 extremely
1low-, 178 very low-, 207 low-,
Quantified Objectives: j
231 moderate- and 270 above
moderate-income units)
Strategy 2: Second Dwelling Units. The City will continue
to implement the Second Dwelling Unit Ordinance and
encourage the production of second units.
Cupertino Department of I
i
3 Responsible Agencies: Community Development/
i
Planning Division
Time Frame: Ongoing
Funding Sources: None required j
i
Four second units annually for a ;Quantified Objectives:
total of 32 units over eight years ;
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E_2 3
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
Strategy 3: Lot Consolidation. To facilitate residential and
o
mixed use developments, the City will continue to:k w, _.:.. ,,,,
Encourage lot consolidation when contiguous smaller,
y t (, $
RT Y {
underutilized parcels are to be redeveloped
a;
Encourage master plans for such sites with coordinatedr
r
x
I
g ` ` , ;.; *' '!access and circulation
1e., .>.
Provide technical assistance to property owners of
Cupertino vili encourage the development
of mixed-uss centers
adjacent parcels to facilitate coordinated redevelopment
where appropriate
Encourage intra- and inter-agency cooperation in working
with applicants at no cost prior to application submittal
for assistance with preliminary plan review.
Cupertino Department of
Responsible Agencies: Community Development/
Planning Division
Time Frame: Ongoing
Funding Sources: None required
Quantified Objectives: N/A
Strategy 4: Flexible Development Standards. The City
recognizes the need to encourage a range of housing
options in the community. The City will continue to:
Offer flexible residential development standards in
planned residential zoning districts, such as smaller
lot sizes, lot widths, floor area ratios and setbacks,
particularly for higher density and attached housing
developments
Consider granting reductions in off-street parking on a
case-by-case basis for senior housing.
H E-2 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
m.. ,
Cupertino Department of v;
Responsible Agencies: Community Development/ k..?'
Planning Division T p
i Time Frame: Ongoing i
5.'r;_'s l'3f
Funding Sources: None required s
i Quantified Objectives: N/A
Za - .U_Y':
s' ,
y4
T
1... i" `
a.F-i'+c..7
Strategy 5: Heart of the City Specific Plan. To I'eduCe The Housing Element should identify land
constraints to housing development, and in order to ensure at appropriate densities to accommodate
that the designated sites can obtain the realistic capacity the Regional Housing Needs Allocation
shown in the Housing Element, the City will review revisions (
RHNA)
to the Heart of the City Specific Plan residential density
calculation requirement, to eliminate the requirement to net
the non-residential portion of the development from the lot
area.
t .__ . _._..__..__.
r.,...m.__.._._--a-
Cupertino Department of
Responsible Agencies: Community Development/ i
Planning Division
Time Frame: 2016
Funding Sources: None required
Quantified Objectives: N/A _
6»,.4.,q w ;
w • .
Policy HE-4: Housing Mitigation
Ensure that all new developments—including market-rate
residential developments—help mitigate project-related
impact on affordable housing needs.
HCD REVIEWED ORAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E-2 5
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
c, Policy HE-5: Range of Housing Types
i `
x '
Encourage the development of diverse housing stockt
that provides a range of housing types (including smaller,M.;
moderate cost housing) and affordability levels. Emphasize
4'_. . V ti+ the provision of housing for lower- and moderate-income
y r
i , ` y households including wage earners who provide essential
public services (e.g., school district employees, municipal
and ublic safet em lo ees, etc.)p Y P Y
Policy HE-6: Development of Affordable Housing
s"`%'' and Housing for Persons with Special Needsr _
Maintain and/or adopt appropriate land use regulations and
other development tools to encourage the development
F=- =- - of affordable housing. Make every reasonable effort to
disperse units throughout the community but not at thetI j { expense of undermining the fundamental goal of providing
r'
N affordable units.
r;-` i ;,',menting Strategies1 -
Strategy 6: Office and Industrial Housing Mitigation
y
Program. The City will continue to implement the Office
3 ' •...i ; and (ndustrial Housing Mitigation Program. This program
1L
requires that developers of office, commercial, andf,
r. -" industrial space pay a mitigation fee, which will then be
k -.
used to support affordable housing in the City of Cupertino.
r;;; o ;o.s;opr ons SE,_;- ;- These mitigation fees are collected and deposited in the
encouraged in the community City's Below Market-Rate Affordable Housing Fund (BMR
AHF).
Cupertino Department of
Responsible Agencies: Community Development/
Planning Division i
i Time Frame: Ongoing
Funding Sources: BMR AHF i
Quantified Ob'ectives N/A1__.___....__.:. ...._-...............___.__._.....__.... .____.___.._---._._.
H E-2 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
Strategy 7: Residential Housing Mitigation Program.
The City will continue to implement the Residential
Housing Mitigation Program to mitigate the need for
affordable housing created by new market-rate residential w
t y..
development. This program applies to new residential
i - _ development. Mitigation includes either the payment of
the "Housing Mitigation" fee or the provision of a Below x ,: .,
i+kJ'w ir7iiarei..:kav:L.':,:' ."',`x'M"py,_..._. I,
Market-Rate (BMR unit or units. Pro'ects of seven or more --....
for-sale units must provide on-site BMR units. Projects of six .
or consol dar o, will continue to be
units or fewer for-sale units can either build one BMR unit encouraged for development
or pay the Housing Mitigation fee. Developers of market-
rate rental units, where the units cannot be sold individually,
must pay the Housing Mitigation fee to the BMR AHF. The
BMR program specifies the following:
a. Priority. To the extent permitted by law, priority for
occupancy is given to Cupertino residents, Cupertino full-
time employees and Cupertino public service employees
as defined in Cupertino's Residential Housing Mitigation
Manual.
b. For-Sale Residential Developments. Require 15% for-sale
BMR units in all residential developments where the units
can be sold individually (including single-family homes,
common interest developments, and condominium
conversions or allow rental BMR units as allowed in (d)
below).
c. Rental Residential Developments: To the extent
permitted by law, require 15% rental very low and low-
income BMR units in all rental residential developments.
If the City is not permitted by law to require BMR units in
rental residential developments, require payment of the
Housing Mitigation Fee:
d. Rental Alternative. Allow rental BMR units in for-sale
residential developments, and allow developers of
market-rate rental developments to provide on-site rental
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E-2 7
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
BMR units, if the developer: 1) enters into an agreement
i..
A° `' --+! limiting rents in exchange for a financial contribution or a
type of assistance specified in density bonus law (which
includes a variety of regulatory reliefl; and 2) provides
very low-income and low-income BMR rental units.
E'' e e. Affordable Prices and Rents. Establish guidelines for
rr ,,
I_
i -
o
i, affordable sales prices and affordable rents for new
E .. ' ,
affordable housing and update the guidelines each year
Deve(opment of housing for persons v;tn as new income guidelines are received;
special needs is a pnority for Cupertmo
f. Development of BMR Units Off Site. Allow developers to
meet all or a portion of their BMR or Housing Mitigation
fee requirement by making land available for the City or
a nonprofit housing developer to construct affordable
housing, or allow developers to construct the required
BMR units off site, in partnership with a nonprofit.
The criteria for land donation or off-site BMR units (or
combination of the two options) will be identified in the
Residential Housing Mitigation Manual.
g. BMR Term. Require BMR units to remain affordable for
a minimum of 99 years; and enforce the City's first right
of refusal for BMR units and other means to ensure that
BMR units remain affordable.
Cupertino Department of
Community Development/
Responsible Agencies:
Planning Division and Housing
Division
Time Frame: Ongoing i
Funding Sources: BMR AHF
Quantified Objectives: 20 BMR units over eight years
T M.L.__-- --______ __..__.___..__...____.__. ___----_,._.
H E-2 8 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
Strategy 8: Below Market-Rate (BMR) Affordable
Housing Fund (AHF). The City's BMR AHF will continue
to support affordable housing projects, strategies and
services, including but not limited to:
i
BMR Program Administration
4
r ......x -.'
Substantial rehabilitation
A;Y .
Land acquisition
The Housing Plan should encourage a
Acquisition of buildings for permanent affordability, with diverse stock of housing types
or without rehabilitation
New construction
Preserving "at-risk" BMR units
Rental operating subsidies
Down payment assistance
Land write-downs
Direct gap financing
Fair housing
The City will target a portion of the BMR AHF to benefit
extremely low-income households and persons with special
needs (such as the elderly, victims of domestic violence,
and the disabled, including persons with developmental
disabilities), to the extent that these target populations
are found to be consistent with the needs identified in the
nexus study the City prepares to identify the connection,
or "nexus" between new developments and the need for
affordable housing.
To ensure the mitigation fees continue to be adequate to
mitigate the impacts of new development on affordable
housing needs, the City will update its Nexus Study for the
Housing Mitigation Plan by the end of 2015.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E -2 9
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
Cupertino Department of
Community Development/
s Responsible Agencies:
Planning Division and Housing
R Division
On oin /annuall ublish RFPs iggYp
Time Frame: to solicit projects; update Nexus
j i+Study by the end of 2015
Funding Sources: BMR AHF
Cupertino's Below Market Rate Affordable j Quantified Objectives: N/A
Housing Fund will cont;nue to su por
affordable housing projects, programs, and
serv ces
Strategy 9: Housing Resources. Cupertino residents and
developers interested in providing affordable housing in
the City have access to a variety of resources administered
by other agencies. The City will continue to provide
information on housing resources and services offered by
the County and other outside agencies. These include, but
are not limited to:
Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) - Santa Clara County
Housing and Community Development Department
First-Time Homebuyer Assistance and Developer Loans
for Multi-Family Development - Housing Trust Silicon
Valley (HTS
Housing Choice Vouchers (Section 8) - Housing Authority
of Santa Clara County (HASCC)
Affordable housing development - Santa Clara County
HOME Consortium
The City will also continue to explore and pursue various
affordable housing resources available at the local, regional,
state, and federal levels that could be used to address
housing needs in the community.
H E-3 0 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
Cupertino Department of
Responsible Agencies: Community Development/
i
Housing Division
Time Frame: Ongoing m.:
Funding Sources: None required
fie
l
r..
Quantified Ob ectives: N/A j ; r d
Strategy 10: Surp lus Properties for Housing. T he City wi l l Th C r.y wil! update rts Nexus Study for the
explore opportunities on surplus properties as follows: Ho sing Mic garion Plan by the end of 2015
Work with local public agencies, school districts and
churches, to identify surplus properties or underutilized
properties that have the potential for residential
development.
Encourage long-term land leases of properties
from churches, school districts, and corporations for
construction of affordable units.
Evaluate the feasibility of developing special housing
for teachers or other employee groups on the surplus
properties.
Research other jurisdictions' housing programs for
teachers for their potential applicability in Cupertino.
Responsible Agencies: Cupertino Department of
d
Community Development/ r
Planning Division
Time Frame: Ongoing; evaluate housing pro-
I grams for teachers in 2015
Funding Sources: BMR AHF
Quantified Objectives: N/A i
a___.____,_.__..._._... .. ._,_ _. ..._.___...._. .,_..,_._._..__ -----.__.____.._r._....___._,
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E-3 1
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
Strategy 11: Incentives for Affordable Housing
Development. The City will continue to offer a range
of incentives to facilitate the development of affordable
i ,,' '`'. ;;
t ': housing. These include:
i
a,.s.:.': Financial assistance through the City's Below Market-r. ^:_
E"",Rate Affordable Housing Fund (BMR AHF) and CDBG
4
funds
Partner with CDBG and/or support the funding
The Crty's Below iar.'cet Rate Residential
Mitigation Program requires all new application of qualified affordable housing developers
residential developers to either provide for regional, state, and federal affordable housing funds,
below market rate units or pay a mitigation including HOME funds, Low Income Housing Tax Credits
fee
LIHTC), and mortgage revenue bonds
Density bonus incentives (see Strategy 12)
Flexible development standards
Technical assistance
Waiver of park dedication fees and construction tax
Parking ordinance waivers
Expedited permit processing
The City joined the Santa Clara County HOME Consortium
so that HOME funds for eligible affordable housing projects
within the City of Cupertino are available beginning federal
fiscal year 2015.
Responsible Agencies: Cupertino Department of
Community Development/
Planning Division and Housing
Division
Time Frame: Ongoing incentives (annually i
publish RFPs to solicit projects);
joined HOME Consortium in 2014 I
Funding Sources: BMR AHF; CDBG; HOME;
General Fund
Quantified Objectives: N/A
L--------_-_-•_,_______.._._.__...__.__._.___..___.._...__.___.___.---..__...___.__._._.__.,... __ ._ ..__;
H E-3 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
Strategy 12: Density Bonus Ordinance. The City will r {
4
encourage use of density bonuses and incentives, as r;
applicable, for housing developments which include one of r ti
the following: i ;
T ,''Tsq,_•
t.'
At least 5 percent of the housing units are restricted to ;; ' -; ,,,, J
very low income residents 3 °
At least 10 percent of the housing units are restricted to
lower income residents Affordable housing de.velopment will
continue to be incentivized by the City
At least 10 percent of the housing units in a for-sale
common interest development are restricted to moderate
income residents.
The project donates at least one acre of land to the city
or county large enough for 40 very low income units;
the land has the appropriate general plan designation,
zoning, permits, approvals, and access to public facilities
needed for such housing; funding has been identified;
and other requirements are met.
A density bonus of up to 20 percent must be granted to
projects that contain one of the following:
The project is a senior citizen housing development (no
affordable units required}
The project is a mobile home park age restricted to
senior citizens (no affordable units required)
For projects that contain on-site affordable housing,
developers may request one to three regulatory
concessions, which must result in identifiable cost
reductions and be needed to make the housing affordable.
The City will update the density bonus ordinance as
necessary to respond to future changes in State law.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT li E-3 3
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
Cupertino Department of
Community Development/
Responsibie Agencies
Planning Division and Housing
Division
r`
Time Frame Ongoing
K r - Funding Sources None Required
1
r,R, 4 Quantified Objectives N/A
Ihe C ys D nsity Bonus Ordinance vifi be
updated to respond to changes in the law Strategy 13: Extremely Low-Income Housing and
Housing for Persons with Special Needs. The City will
continue to encourage the development of adequate
housing to meet the needs of extremely low-income
households and persons with special needs (such as the
elderly, victims of domestic violence, and the disabled,
including persons with developmental disabilities).
Specifically, the City will consider the following incentives:
Provide financing assistance using the Below Market-Rate
Affordable Housing Fund (BMR AHF) and Community
Development Block Grant funds (CDBG).
Allow residential developments to exceed planned
density maximums if they provide special needs
housing and the increase in density will not overburden
neighborhood streets or hurt neighborhood character.
Grant reductions in off-street parking on a case-by-case
basis.
Partner with and/or support the funding application of
qualified affordable housing developers for regional,
state, and federal affordable housing funds, including
HOME funds, Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC),
and mortgage revenue bond.
H E-3 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
Cupertino Department of
Responsible Agencies Community Development/ A `
Housing Division F.i.;
Time Frame Ongoing
f
h : • '''--
t' .
Funding Sources BMR AHF; CDBG; HOME t .
I
4
Quantified Ob ectives N/A
The City will continue to encouraye theStrategy14: Employee Housing.development of low income housing for
communities with special needs, such as the
The City permits employee housing in multiple zoning elderly
districts. Pursuant to the State Employee Housing Act, any
employee housing consisting of no more than 36 beds in a
group quarters or 12 units or spaces designed for use by a
single family or household shall be deemed an agricultural
land use. No conditional use permit, zoning variance, or
other zoning clearance shall be required of this employee
housing that is not required of any other agricultural
activity in the same zone. The permitted occupancy in
employee housing in a zone allowing agricultural uses
shall include agricultural employees who do not work on
the property where the employee housing is located. The
Employee Housing Act also specifies that housing for six
or fewer employees be treated as a residential use. The
City amended the Zoning Ordinance to be consistent with
the State law in 2014 and will continue to comply with the
Employee Housing Act where it would apply.
1CupertinoDepartmentof
Community Development/ 'i Responsible Agencies
Planning Division and
Housing Division
Time Frame Ongoing
Funding Sources None Required
Quantified Objectives N/A
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E-3 5
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
Ft t`w" i S
7:'y } '`'a i'—.
et 'y" ., ,• a•_•t .¢+•
j..`..yy. L ` ` . I,', +y
V',`.. '''"` K:. y ;
i.
t .: -
4 olicy HE-7: Housing Rehabiiitation
Pursue and/or provide funding for the acquisition/
rehabilitation of housing that is affordable to very low-,
ThE C ty of Cupe r,o perrr,_ r r o;:u low-, and moderate-income households. Actively support
housing in agricultural districts
and assist non-profit and for-profit developers in producing
affordable units.
Policy HE-8: Maintenance and Repair
Assist lower-income homeowners and rental property
owners in maintaining and repairing their housing units.
Policy HE-9: Conservation of Housing Stock
The City's existing multi-family units provide opportunities
for households of varied income levels. Preserve existing
multi-family housing stock by preventing the net loss of
multi-family housing units in new development and the
existing inventory of affordable housing units that are at risk
of converting to market-rate housing.
Implementing Strategies
Strategy 15: Residential Rehabilitation. The City will
continue to:
Utilize its Below Market-Rate Affordable Housing Fund
BMR AHF) and Community Development Block Grant
CDBG) funds to support residential rehabilitation efforts
in the community. These include:
Acquisition/rehabilitation of rental housing
Rehabilitation of owner-occupied housing
H E-3 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
Provide assistance for home safety repairs and mobility/
accessibility improvements to income-qualified owner-
occupants using CDBG funds. The focus of this strategy r
is on the correction of safety hazards.l!%.;.---7, '` `
iPartnerwithand/or support the funding application of r qualified affordable housing developers for regional,
state, and federal affordable housing funds, including
1,-HOME funds, Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), r .,
and mortgage revenue bonds. The rry sh i o nue ro suppo 7 ths
rehabilitation of very low, low, and moderate
income housing
w w Mp p-'y'
4yCupertino Department of ;t
Community Development/
i Responsible Agencies i
Housing Division; West Valley ,
Community Services
Ongoing/annually publish s Time Frame
RFPs to solicit projects
Funding Sources BMR AHF; CDBG; HOME
Rehabilitate five units per
Quantified Objectives year for a total of 40 units ;
over eight years i
Strategy 16: Preservation of At-Risk Housing Units.
One housing project — Beardon Drive (eight units) — is
considered at risk of converting to market-rate housing
during the next ten years. The City will proactively contact
the property owner regarding its intent to remain or opt
out of the affordable program. In the event the project
becomes at risk of converting to market-rate housing, the
City will work with the property owner or other interested
nonprofit housing providers to preserve the units. The
City will also conduct outreach to the tenants to provide
information on any potential conversion and available
affordable housing assistance programs.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E-3 7
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
The City will continue to monitor its entire portfolio of
affordable housing for-sale and rental inventory annually.
The City will monitor its affordable for-sale inventory by
requiring Below Market-Rate (BMR) homeowners to submit
proof of occupancy such as utility bills, mortgage loan
r
7 documentation, homeowner's insurance, and property tax
bills. The City will further monitor its affordable for-sale
inventory by ordering title company lot books, reviewing
property profile reports and updating its public database
T;e G, ,:; 5 3 i,4,yr d BG to annually. The City will monitor its affordable rental inventory
support resia'enr al rehabilitation thrvugho rt
Cupertino by verifying proof of occupancy and performing annual
rental income certifications for each BMR tenant. The
City records a Resale Restriction Agreement against each
affordable BMR for-sale unit and a Regulatory Agreement
for BMR rental units to help ensure long-term affordability.
To help further preserve the City's affordable housing stock,
the City may consider providing assistance to rehabilitate
and upgrade the affordable units as weli.
Cupertino Department of
Responsible Agencies Community Development/
Housing Division
i Annually monitor status of
i affordable projects; contact
property owner of at risk j
i Time Frame
project at least one year i
in advance of potential
conversion date.
Funding Sources BMR AHF; CDBG; HOME
Quantified Objectives
N/A
p____._____.___._.__._...-------.----.--______.___.____._.
Strategy 17: Condominium Conversion. The existing
Condominium Conversion Ordinance regulates the
conversion of rental units in multi-family housing
development in order to preserve the rental housing
H E-3 8 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
stock. Condominium conversions are not allowed if the
rental vacancy rate in Cupertino and certain adjacent areas
is less than five ercent at the time of the a lication y '
r •
y :p PP r - . ' ' -
for conversion and has averaged five percent over the y .
s°'I' t.,. r " .
ast six months. The i A ' `' t " _ ' ''p C ty will continue to monitor the
effectiveness of this ordinance in providing opportunities for '"
j
a_
homeownership while preserving a balanced housing stock i ` ' ' ""
with rental housing.
i The City will continue to monitor housing
Y
Cupertino Department of r
that is considered at risk for converting toResponsibleAgenciesCommunityDevelopment/ market-rate housing
Planning Division
i Time Frame Ongoing
Funding Sources None required
Quantified Objectives N/A
Strategy 18: Housing Preservation Program. When a
proposed development or redevelopment of a site would
cause a loss of multi-family housing, the City will grant
approval only if:
The project will comply with the City's Below Market-Rate
Program,
The number of units provided on the site is at least equal
to the number of existing units, and
Adverse impacts on displaced tenants, in developments
with more than four units, are mitigated.
In addition, indirect displacement may be caused by
factors such as increased market rents as areas become
more desirable. The City will participate, as appropriate,
in studies of regional housing need and displacement,
and consider policies or programs to address the indirect
displacement of lower income residents as appropriate.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
3 9
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
Cupertino Department of
r
Responsible Agencies
Community Development )
rw•, Planning Division andi.j
Housing Division
1,...
w
R
Time Frame Ongoing I
r _ aa y
r
Funding Sources None Required j
9 r~..
i Quantified Objectives N/A
The City will moniror its portioiio o
affordable for-sale and rental housing
annually
Strategy 19: Neighborhood and Community Clean-Up
Campaigns. The City will continue to encourage and
sponsor neighborhood and community clean-up campaigns
for both public and private properties.
Cupertino Department of
Responsible Agencies
Community Development
Time Frame Ongoing I
Funding Sources General Funds
Quantified Objectives N/A
t
Policy HE-10: Energy and Water Conservation
Encourage energy and water conservation in all existing
and new residential development.
Implementing Strategies
Strategy 20: Enforcement of Title 24. The City will contin-
ue to enforce Title 24 requirements for energy conservation
and will evaluate utilizing some of the other suggestions
as identified in the Environmental Resources/Sustainability
element.
H E-4 0
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
Cupertino Department of y+ •, '''` "' ` ~', ",'e .
Jtt' }' r °
r
Res onsible A encies Communi Develo ment a 'A P 9 tY p v , ,r'a, `h.` ^t
Department/Building Division ;.` '';. r .`" ' ; ..r;
ti. .,: .'+
r
Time Frame Ongoing
4,
ry , N` ;
i,y ,, *
t" ^
t f'.y A; . F .
Funding Sources None Required
i r'y 4 'i''r E f l'
i Quantified Objectives N/A 4, ;a;':`
a' t < '.` .
F C v Ir'C"s'vl'.+e."r .^,r a
Strategy 21: Sustainable Practices. The City will continue or„r,,u„ ar, UF, „Na gns w;ll
to implement the Landscape Ordinance for water continue to be sponsored for both public
conservation and the Green Building Ordinance (adopted and private properties
in 2013) that applies primarily to new residential and
nonresidential development, additions, renovations, and
tenant improvements of ten or more units.
To further the objectives of the Green Building Ordinance,
the City will evaluate the potential to provide incentives,
such as waiving or reducing fees, for energy conservation
improvements at affordable housing projects (existing or
new) with fewer than ten units to exceed the minimum
requirements of the California Green Building Code. This
City will also implement the policies in its climate action
plan to achieve residential-focused greenhouse gas
emission reductions and further these community energy
and water conservation goals
T._.,.._..........____..n_
Cupertino Department of i
Community Development/ i
Responsible Agencies
Planning Division and
Building Division
i Ongoing; consider further
j incentives in 2015 to i
Time Frame encourage green building
practices in smaller
i developments i
i
iFundingSourcesNoneRequired
Quantified Objectives N/A
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E-4 1
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
r.
n
i r,.J.
L ,
a " —
ii i
Y.
a.;
y
a' _ Policy HE-11: Lower-income and Special Needs
Households
Support organizations that provide services to lower-mcome
1-..r . ;. . ''„q.=
The c tys a dscap ord n ce w i households and special need households in the City,
continue to be implemented for water such as the homeless, elderly, disabled and single parent
conservation households.
mplementing Strategies
Strategy 22: Emergency Shelters. The City will continue to
facilitate housing opportunities for special needs persons by
allowing emergency shelters as a permitted use in the "BQ"
Quasi-Public zoning district. The City will subject emergency
shelters to the same development standards as other
similar uses within the BQ zoning district, except for those
provisions permitted by State law and provided in the Zoning
Ordinance for emergency shelters.
Cupertino Department of
Responsible Agencies Community Development/ ;
Planning Division
Time Frame Ongoing
Funding Sources None Required
1
Quantified Objectives N/A
w._.`_..._......R_._..
Strategy 23: Supportive Services for Lower-Income
Households and Persons with Special Needs. The City
will continue to utilize its Below Market-Rate Affordable
Housing Fund, Community Development Block Grant
H E-4 2
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
CDBG) funds, and General Fund Human Service Grants
f':
i
Y
HSG) funds to provide for a range of supportive services
for lower-income households and persons with special
t .
needs.
u.w,oi
Cupertino Department of x`
Responsible Agencies Community Development/ r „;.Ti ii ,
N
Housing Division s
Annually through the Action The City wil`continue r provide Fair
Plan funding application Housing services for all residents of
process allocate CDBG and Cupertino
Time Frame HSG to organizations that E
cater to the needs of lower E
income and special needs
households i
Funding Sources BMR AHF; CDBG; HSG
I j
Quantified Objectives N/A
e_.__.._.________.__.__...w_._..F___.ry______._._____.__.._
Strategy 24: Rotating Homeless Shelter. The City will
continue to support the operation of a Rotating Homeless
Shelter program.
Cupertino Department of
Community Development/
Responsible Agencies
Housing Division; Faith in
Action
Time Frame Ongoing
Funding Sources CDBG; HSG; BMR AHF r
i
Quantified Objectives N/A
a.__..__._.,..a._,._._ _.._.._________.____.__.F..._.__._______i
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E-4 3
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
rr ' ' i
y
YF _
icy HE-12: Housing Discrimination
Y
i he City will work to eliminate on a citywide basis allirr
nlawful discrimination in housing with respect to age, race,
F.: -
l :,
s. ' :x, sexual orientation, marital or familial status, ethnic
i:..::+ k ackground, medical condition, or other arbitrary factors, so
A 2010 zoning amendment allo,; io. r at all persons can obtain decent housing.
emergency shelters as a matter of right in
the Quasi-Public zoning district Implementing Strategies
Strategy 25: Fair Housing Services. The City will continue
to:
Provide fair housing services, which include outreach,
education, counseling, and investigation of fair housing
complaints.
Retain a fair housing service provider to provide direct
services for residents, landlords, and other housing
professionals.
Coordinate with efforts of the Santa Clara County Fair
Housing Consortium to afFirmatively further fair housing.
Distribute fair housing materials produced by various
organizations at public counters and public events.
Cupertino Department of
Community Development/
Housing Division; Santa
Responsible Agencies Clara County Fair Housing
Consortium; Eden Council
for Hope and Opportunity
ECHO)
Time Frame Ongoing
Funding Sources BMR AHF; CCDBG
j Quantified Objectives N/A j
1_ _____ _.__._._..____.e.._.______....______.,...__..._....,
H E-4 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
CHAPTER 4
Housing Element
a , ! • ' i•
r. r—'
1 '-
Policy NE-13: Coordination with Local School W
Districts
4.u...- The Cupertino community places a high value on the
excellent quality of education provided by the three
public school districts which serve residents. To ensure the The City shall continue to support the
long-term sustainability of the schools in tandem with the operat on of rotating homeless shelters
preservation and development of vibrant residential areas,
the City will continue to coordinate with the Cupertino
Union School District (CUSD), Fremont Union High School
District (FUHSD), and Santa Clara Unified School District
SCUSD).
Policy HE-14: Coordination with Regional Efforts to
Add ess Housing-Related Issue$
Coordinate efforts with regional organizations, including
ABAG and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BAAQMD), as well as neighboring jurisdictions, to address
housing and related quality of life issues (such as air quality
and transportation).
Policy HE-1 S: Public-Private Partnerships
Promote public-private partnerships to address housing
needs in the community, especially housing for the
workforce.
Implementing Strategies
Strategy 26: Coordination with Outside Agencies and
Organizations. The City recognizes the importance of
partnering with outside agencies and organizations in
addressing local and regional housing issues.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT H E-4 5
2040 GENERAL PLAN
City of Cupertino
i'&; These may include, but are not limited to, the following:
f`
School districts1-r ' } ':. ,'r'•t,-
f',r:
i :
k '
a ,'Y + ... ^ '.
d Housing providersk. "`f '.t
k . o as
r ; '5 ' '' Neighboring jurisdictions
I -"...
j rk+v^;.wr^ YA '
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
Ws- k ;,.t.a`-.'-xi.._
Air Quality Management District
The City ili conCinue e-ork to eiim,nate
unfawfut nousing d scrimination Housing Trust Silicon Valley
Santa Clara County Fair Housing Consortium
Santa Clara County HOME Consortium
Santa Clara County Continuum of Care (COC)
Housing Authority of Santa Clara County (HASCC)
Valley Transportation Authority (VTA)
Specifically, the City will meet with these agencies/
organizations periodically to discuss the changing needs,
development trends, alternative approaches, and partnering
opportunities.
Cupertino Department of
Community Development
Responsible Agencies
Planning Division and
Housing Division
Time Frame Ongoing
Funding Sources None Required
1
Quantified Objectives N/A
a___.._..___..________.v_.w...._.._..__._____.......___._.__._____..._.__
H E-4 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
i i iivi i
l
at w..#.:-+l.e•,-..bs°d'!!'a.,i`,w:. e d ;.. .ss .,a. .+
t
y.
r "` .
s...-
4 JT' 4`--f_ r'` ." G;y._f.`i, r
ti,.4 .r<y . r
L"ti .., - . .., . .... ...:._ _ . ..'. . }..1._.4ryj
y _ .- . c+ `
M . J
ar,ae _• . ,c = r.r: _ _ _,_
Y, y ;
Hs r'
r.,: . ..--. v.m , '' ",` :. .. --.. ,
r R,y .. ^- . e.r v+wP_ ."Yir,t_ y ' '.\n'
f"a
r s.?".. . .+- .. .
rr --. ]`
y'
i
i'
ti., .'::....
F/
y
ti.y _+'*w*.f., ."':k., '!L".3i'C. -
r1..}
x "'"1re ' •
i
i
a .,.. , .:
u
4 .
J3•+I a' 4.,',..j.. * - .y
ak
1 > t"..` . sxin".-
er-^r.
w«~ ,,,„3yg e w
i' 1Ktm}
i..,"'-,-'-T'''.v,.., r x f,..i. ----,.,-_ e "" ....—
e - .i.-.,..
a,
s
e.. L+,' zr ' -. :: j,a,.h
Z.t) ., a+. •
x:— s' "
1 F , '" ca c++. !fir.,5! .11R'
r p.•
i. • '": ,^,.'•:...e"' ow•....,.x- i .
4 :i. k*•
a
s
w. :'
I
i^ ..
P y,# '
r,:. .
R i: .5: yys.
y.r"r."`°C," r f r
t.:.+1 T•"P
y., '
i
s . . t Y' .
ai m
u
i.,
g Rw'xi..'.t
j ;.
s f t
Ss ; .
y'
r f ,R .
tm4.. .=' `' k 1, k
r
f
YAF r.. t . ef.4rea
r
w{
M1 Y
f,i f+"_ . ' . • '_''
4
i . q .t ``
X , I-..
g ' f d F `A.i
Y i .: L"L'SYrt'.'
i + e. f 4 .'dl . j{:I
A,{ a i
y±
rf_.f
Y .
i . , i .: f .i
5' tl. i,.. ,i
f
E
r. r..v: . - i i 1 ,Y
a , - i i '
k- ,-_ ''=t'
Ta ; 4,
d s;l a t
p Y
r:...—o::.
a t
5 r
af' '}«t. -a.
Y
f
a r a. i 4 ;
F
l ' ^` r'
S,k4 • i'
Y . 1',`6`.: i' .4t ••. -'ll.. . 1 •
1 jtT4J' ": ! . .
i4
y' r
f'1i, '"'-"4e'
r t ; `ai `' .
i y.ati,Y :.,.' 4 . .fi_, r. _ n..,_..,,;. >„,,n-t - <:;._ _,
i/ ti"'.i '
W y
r
f.` `, '~ QT`
e 4a,,,-,,.,.,...-„VuY}'
ia I fi;"+I a
T_ a,
r%
p endix B
HOUSING ELEMENT TECHNICAL REPORT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
INTRC[1 T1 3
Cupertino is a unique community with a high quality of life,
a renowned school system, and a robust high-technology
economy. The long-term vitality of Cupertino and the
local economy depend upon the availability of all types of
housing to meet the community's diverse housing needs.
As Cupertino looks towards the future, increasing the range • '
and diversity of housing options will be integral to the
City's success. Consistent with the goal of being a balanced
community, this Housing Element continues the City's
commitment to ensuring new opportunities for residential
development, as well as for preserving and enhancing our
existing neighborhoods.
The Housing Element Technical Report describes the City
of Cupertino's procedures and Municipal Code as of 2014.
This Report does not limit the City's ability to amend or
repeal the procedures or ordinances so long as these
changes are not inconsistent with the policies in this Report.
1.1 Role and Content of Housing Element
This Housing Element is a comprehensive eight-year plan
to address the housing needs in Cupertino. The Housing
Element is the City's primary policy document regarding the
development, rehabilitation, and preservation of housing
for all economic segments of the population. Per State
Housing Element law, the document must be periodically
updated to:
Outline the community's housing production objectives
consistent with State and regional growth projections
Describe goals, policies and implementation strategies to
achieve local housing objectives
Examine the local need for housing with a focus on
special needs populations
Identify adequate sites for the production of housing
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 8•3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
serving various income levels
Analyze potential constraints to new housing production
Evaluate the Housing Element for consistency with other
General Plan elements
Housing element law continually evolves. This element
for the 2014-2022 planning period addresses all laws
adopted since the element was last updated in 2010. SB
812 requires that the City assess the housing needs of
developmentally disabled persons. SB 244, which does
not pertain to the housing element per se but is triggered
by a housing element update, requires that cities and
counties address the infrastructure needs of disadvantaged
unincorporated communities within the jurisdiction's
designated sphere of influence. According to data from
the California Department of Water Resources, Cupertino
contains no disadvantaged communities within its sphere of
influence.
This updated Housing Element focuses on housing needs
from January 31, 2015 through January 31, 2023, in
accordance with the housing element planning period for
San Francisco Bay Area jurisdictions estabiished by State
law.
Relationship to the General Plan
State law requires that a General Plan and its constituent
elements "comprise an integrated, internally consistent
and compatible statement of policies." This implies that
all elements have equal legal status; no one element is
subordinate to any other element. This Housing Element
must be consistent with the policies and proposals set forth
by the General Plan, including the Land Use and Circulation
Elements. Additionally, environmental constraints identified
in the Health and Safety Element and the Environmental
Resources/Sustainability Element are recognized in the
a-4 HCD REVtEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Techn cal Report
Housing Element. When an element in the General Plan
is amended, the Housing Element will be reviewed and
modified as necessary to ensure continued consistency
among the various elements. The City will ensure that
updates to these elements achieve internal consistency with
the Housing Element as well.
1 .2 Public Partiapation
This Housing Element has been developed with
extensive participation from members of the Cupertino
community. The public participation process described
below engaged a diverse set of community stakeholders
in a productive dialogue on housing issues. Participants
included community members, property owners, housing
developers, service providers, school districts, and the
business community.
Meeting and workshop announcements and agendas, as
well as presentation materials and web cast archives of all
stakeholder and community meetings, were posted on the
City's website. A postcard advertising meetings (February
19, March 4, March 11, and April 1) was direct mailed to all
Cupertino addresses to ensure that all economic segments
of the community were invited to participate. Email
notification for all meetings was sent to persons requesting
information about the General Plan Update (over 300
persons). The paragraphs below summarize the outreach
activities and meetings in more detail.
Stakeholder Interviews
To inform the Cupertino Housing Element update and
identify key housing needs, issues, and opportunities, the
update team interviewed approximately 25 stakeholders.
Most of the stakeholders were interviewed in small groups
organized by interest, including community advocates,
economic development, service providers, school districts,
and property owners/developers. The team conducted six
HCD REVfEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupertino
group interviews and one individual interview. To ensure
that the concerns of low- and moderate-income and
special needs residents were addressed, agencies and
organizations that serve the low- and moderate-income and
special needs community were invited to participate in the
stakeholder interviews. Section 7 includes a list of invited
and interviewed parties as well as a summary of key themes
and findings.
Joint Planning Commission/Housing
Commission Workshop
On January 23, 2014 the Planning Commission and
Housing Commission hosted a joint workshop to begin
discussion on potential housing sites. Eleven participants
broke into small groups and identified potential future sites
and the criteria for increasing density in certain areas.
Housing Commission Workshop
On February 12, 2014, the Housing Commission hosted
a workshop to continue the sites discussion and prioritize
sites for inclusion in the Housing Element. Following a
project update presentation, the 15 participants broke
into groups to prioritize potential housing sites, with the
goal of showing adequate capacity to achieve a housing
production goal of 1,064 units, consistent with Cupertino's
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for 2014-2022.
Planning Commission Open House and Study
Session
On February 19, 2014, the Planning Commission hosted
an open house and study session to provide a public
forum to continue the Housing Element sites discussion.
A public hearing was conducted on the item and the
Planning Commission recommended criteria to focus the
sites selection. Specifically, the Commission recommended
removing sites that were viewed as unviable (successful
shopping centers, sites with existing established
g_6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
institutional uses, and small sites with low yield or no
property owner interest). The Planning Commission
recommended including sites that would further three
goals:
Distribute housing throughout the city
Encourage development along the Priority Development
Area designated by the One Bay Area plan
Minimize impacts to schools
City Council Study Session
On March 4, 2014 the City Council held a study session to
discuss the potential housing sites that would be analyzed
in the environmental document to be prepared for the
Housing Element update and parallel amendments to the
Land Use and Circulation Elements. A public hearing was
conducted and community members had the opportunity
to comment on the Housing Element and housing sites.
Housing Commission Meeting on Housing
Policy
On March 19, 2014, the Housing Commission held a study
session to discuss revisions to housing goals, policies, and
strategies associated with the Housing Element update.
A public hearing was conducted on the item and five
community members attended.
Joint City Council/Planning Commission
Meeting on Housing Policy
On April 1, 2014, the Planning Commission and City
Council held a joint study session to discuss revisions to
housing goals, policies, and strategies included in the
Housing Plan section of the 2014-2022 Housing Element. A
public hearing was conducted on the item and community
members had the opportunity to comment on the Housing
Element Housing Plan.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Community Workshops
A community open house was held on September 16,
2014 to review goals, policies, and strategies outlined in
the Housing Element and General Plan Amendment. In
response to community concerns regarding housing and
development, the City hosted a community workshop
on November 20, 2014 to answer questions regarding
the Housing Element and State Law requirements. At the
workshop, the community was invited to participate in a
discussion regarding the Housing Element requirements
and the General Plan.
Draft Housing Element Hearings
On August 28, 2014, the Housing Commission reviewed
the Draft Housing Element. On October 14 and 20, the
Planning Commission reviewed and commented on the
Draft Housing Element. On November 10, December 2,
and December 3, 2014, the City Council reviewed the
Draft Housing Element and authorized staff to forward the
draft to the State Department of Housing and Community
Development for their review.
1.3 Incorporation of Community Feedback
At the February 19, 2014 Planning Commission open
house and study session, participants emphasized that
future development should reflect the character of the
City and neighborhoods in which they are located. They
also expressed the need to distribute housing throughout
Cupertino and for smaller unit affordable rental housing. In
response, the range of residential sites inventory studied
in included sites outside the City's core as a means to
distribute housing production citywide. The Housing
Element also includes Policy HE-5: Range of Housing Types,
which encourages the development of diverse housing
stock that provides a range of housing types (including
smaller, moderate cost housing) and affordability levels.
g_g HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
A concern about the viability of mixed use was also
expressed during the community outreach activities.
Participants and decision makers noted that developers
are interested in developing the residential portion of a
project and do not include substantial commercial uses. To
reflect this concern, the site suitability analysis—conducted
to identify appropriate sites for inclusion in the Housing
Element—used locational criteria to select sites that could
best facilitate mixed use development, especially at corner
properties where commercial uses are most viable.
Participants at the March 19, 2014 Housing Commission
Study Session suggested that energy conservation
mechanisms can provide cost savings and result in more
affordable housing costs. Existing goals and policies
support energy conservation for all residential construction.
In addition, the City will evaluate the potential to provide
incentives for affordable development to exceed the
minimum requirements of the California Green Building
Code.
Community members and property owners were particularly
involved in the site inventory. The inventory of residential
opportunity sites was developed in consultation with the
Housing Commission, Planning Commission, City Council,
and members of the public. At numerous meetings,
commissioners and council members, as wel) as members
of the public, discussed the inventory. During these
discussions, severa) sites were removed and new sites were
added based on input from stakeholders. Decisions to add
or remove sites were based on realistic expectations for
sites to be redeveloped within the planning period.
School impacts were a common theme during the site
selection process. Staff explained to participants and
decision makers that impact to schools may not be a
goal of the site selection exercise since Government
Code Section 65995 preempts this issue. This law states
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B -9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
that school impact mitigation fees are presumed to fully
mitigate any school impacts associated with development.
To ensure the long-term sustainability of the schools in
tandem with the preservation and development of vibrant
residential areas, Strategy 26 in the Housing Plan directs
the City to continue to coordinate with the Cupertino Union
School District (CUSD), Fremont Union High School District
FUHSD), and Santa Clara Unified School District (SCUSD).
1.4 Organization of Housing Element
Following this introduction, the Housing Element includes
the following components:
An analysis of the City's current and future housing needs
An analysis of governmental and non-governmental
constraints to housing production
An inventory and analysis of housing resources
A housing plan setting forth goals, policies, strategies,
and quantified objectives to address the City's housing
needs
Included at the end of this appendix is a thematic summary
of the stakeholder interviews, a review of the prior (2007-
2014) Housing Element, and a parcel-specific residential
sites inventory.
2 H S M1 FC SSES MEN
The Housing Needs Assessment describes the housing,
economic, and demographic conditions in Cupertino;
assesses the demand for housing for households at all
income levels; and documents the demand for housing
to serve special needs populations. The Housing Needs
Assessment is intended to assist Cupertino in developing
housing goals and formulating policies and strategies that
g_ p HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
address local housing needs.
To facilitate an understanding of how the characteristics
of Cupertino are similar to, or different from, other nearby
communities, this Housing Needs Assessment presents
data for Cupertino alongside comparable data for all of
Santa Clara County and, where appropriate, for the San
Francisco Bay Area and the state of California.
This Needs Assessment incorporates data from numerous
sources, including:
United States Census Bureau and American Community
Surveys (ACS)
Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
State of California Department of Housing and
Community Development (HCD)
State of California Departments of Finance,
State of California Employment and Development
Department, State of California Department of Social
Services
State of California Department of Public Health
United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Comprehensive Housing
Affordability Strategy (CHAS)
Housing Authority of the County of Santa Clara
Santa Clara County Homeless Census
Veronica Tam and Associates (Housing Element
Consultant)
City of Cupertino Community Development Department
CDD)
211 Santa Clara County
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 1
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Craigslist.org
Zillow.com
DQNews.com
Specific data sources are identified in each table or figure.
2.1 Regional Context
Cupertino is a suburban city of 10.9 square miles located
in Santa Clara County. The City incorporated in 1955 and
grew from a small agricultural community into a suburban
place during the expansion of Silicon Valley. The cities of
Los Altos and Sunnyvale limit any potential of expansion
of Cupertino to the north, the cities of Santa Clara and
San Jose abut Cupertino to the east, and Saratoga is to
the immediate west. Unincorporated areas of Santa Clara
County form the southern and western boundaries of the
City.
Cupertino's built environment is dominated by single-family
subdivisions, with distinctive commercial and employment
centers separated from the surrounding residential areas.
Because of the suburban pattern, the city has a largely
automobile-based land use and transportation system.
Highway 85 functions as the main north/south traffic route
through the city, and Interstate 280 is a major east/west
route.
2.2 Population & Household Trends
Population
As presented in Table 2.1, between 2000 and 2010 the City
of Cupertino's population increased by 15.3 percent, which
is at a higher rate than Santa Clara County at 5.9 percent,
San Francisco Bay area as a whole at 5.4 percent, and
the State of California at 10 percent. During this period,
Cupertino grew from 50,546 to 58,302 persons. An increase
B-1 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Hous ng Element Technical Report
of 15.3 percent, this growth was much more significant than
the growth experienced by the region overall. However,
a portion of this population growth can be attributed to
the City's annexation of 168 acres of land between 2000
and 2008. Cupertino's annexation of Garden Gate, Monta
Vista, and scattered County "islands" added 1,600 new
residents. After removing the population increases from
these annexations, the City of Cupertino experienced a
12-percent increase in its population during the previous
decade. By comparison, Santa Clara County's population
grew by 5.9 percent, while the nine-county Bay Area's
population grew by 5.4 percent. Overall, the state of
California's population grew more similarly to Cupertino's,
with an overall increase of 10 percent.
Households
A household is defined as a person or group of persons
living in a housing unit, as opposed to persons living in
group quarters, such as dormitories, convalescent homes,
or prisons. According to the American Community Survey
ACS), there were 20,181 households in Cupertino in 2010
see Table 2.1). The City added approximately 2,000 new
households between 2000 and 2010, an increase of 11
percent. Approximately 600 of these households, however,
resulted from annexations. After adjusting for household
increases due to annexation, the number of households
in Cupertino grew by only eight percent between 2000
and 2010. During the same time period, the number of
households increased by 6.8 percent in Santa Clara County,
5.8 percent in the Bay Area as a whole and 9.3 percent in
the State of California.
Average Household Size
Average household size is a function of the number of
people living in households divided by the number of
occupied housing units in a given area. In Cupertino, the
average household size in 2011 was 2.83, slightly higher
HCD REVIEWEU DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 8- i 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
than the Bay Area as a whole at 2.69, but slightly lower
than Santa Clara County at 2.89 and the State of California
at 2.91 (see Table 2.1). Because population growth has
outpaced the increase in households in Cupertino, the
average household size has increased since 2000. The
contrary is true for the County.
Household Type
Households are divided into two different types, depending
on their composition. Family households are those
consisting of two or more related persons living together.
Non-family households include persons who live alone or
in groups of unrelated individuals. As shown in Table 2.1,
Cupertino has a large proportion of family households.
In 2011, family households comprised 77.4 percent of all
households in the city. Cupertino's family households figure
is higher than Santa Clara County's family households
figure at 70.8 percent and the Bay Area as a whole at 64.8
percent and the State of California at 68.6 percent. As of
2011, Cupertino's non-family households comprised of
22.6 percent of all households in the city. Cupertino's 22.6
percent is lower than Santa Clara County at 29.2 percent
and the Bay Area as a whole at 35.2 percent and State of
California at 31.4 percent.
Household Tenure
Households in Cupertino are more likely to own than
rent their homes. According to Table 2.1, 62.6 percent
of Cupertino households owned their homes in 2010,
a minimal decrease from 2000. Comparing the City of
Cupertino with other jurisdictions, as of 2010, 57.6 percent
owned their home in Santa Clara County, 56.2 percent in
the Bay Area as a whole and 55.9 percent in the State of
California. As of 2010, renter households comprised 37.4
percent of all households in Cupertino, 42.4 percent in
Santa Clara County, 43.8 percent in the Bay Area as a whole
and 44.1 percent in the State of California.
B- 1 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
1 1 1 1 1 1
111 1 /
11 1 1 111 1
City of Cupertino
Population 50,546 58,302 7,756 15.3%
Households 18,204 20,181 1,977 10.9%
Average Household Size(a) 2.75 2.83
Household Type(a)
Families 74.8% 77.4%
Non-Families 25.2% 22.6%
Tenure
Owner 63.6% 62.6%
Renter 36.4% 37.4%
Santa CFa County
Population 1,682,585 1,781,642 99,057 5.9%
Households 565,863 604,204 38,341 6.8%
Average Household Size(a) 2.92 2.89
Household Type(a)
Families 69.9% 70.8%
Non-Families 30.1% 29.2°/a
Tenure
Owner 59.8% 57.6%
Renter 40.2% 42.4%
Bay Area(b)
Population 6,783,760 7,150,739 366,979 5.4%
Households 2,466,019 2,608,023 142,004 5.8%
Average Household Size(a) 2.69 2.69
Household Type(a)
Families 64.7% 64.8%
Non-Families 35.3% 352%
Tenure
Owner 57.7% 56.2%
Renter 42.3% 43.8%
California
Population 33,871,648 37,253,956 3,382,308 10.0%
Households 11,502,870 12,577,498 1,074,628 9.3%
Average Household Size(a) 2.87 2.91
Household Type(a)
Families 68.9% 68.6%
Non-Families 31.1% 31.4%
Tenure
Owner 56.9% 55.9%
Renter 43.1% 44.1%
Notes:
a)Average household size and household type figures from American Community Survey(ACS), 2007-201 1.
b)Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, SantaClara, Solano,and Sonoma Counties.
Source:Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B 1 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Age Distribution
Cupertino's age distribution, shown in Table 2.2, is relatively
similar to that of Santa Clara County, with a few notable
exceptions. In both Cupertino and Santa Clara County,
persons under 20 years old make up over a quarter of the
overall population. In the City, the number and proportion
of persons in this age group have increased slightly since
2000. However, compared to the County as a whole,
Cupertino has a lower proportion of younger adults in the
25 to 34 age range but a higher proportion of older adults
persons 45 to 54 years old). In fact, from 2000 to 2010, the
fastest growing segment of the Cupertino community was
older adults in the 45 to 54 year old age category, which
increased from 15.4 to 17.3 percent of the total population.
In contrast, the proportion of other adults (those in the 25
to 44 age cohort) showed the sharpest decline between
2000 and 2010. In addition, Cupertino's elderly population,
residents age 65 and above, increased from 11 percent to
13 percent between 2000 and 2010.
s i
Under 15 22.4% 22.5% 20.9% 20.2%
15 to 17 4.3% 5.1% 3.9% 3.9%
18 to 20 2.5% 2.8% 3.9% 3.8%
21 to 24 2.7% 2.8% 5.4% 5.1%
25 to 34 12.1% 8.6% 17.8% 15.1%
35 to 44 21.0% 18.2% 17.6% 15.6%
45 to 54 15.4% 17.3% 13.0% 14.8%
55 to 64 8.7% 10.2% 8.0% 10.4%
65 to 74 5.8% 6.2% 5.2% 6.0%
75 to 84 3.8% 4.0% 3.3% 3.5%
85 +1.4% 2.2% 1.1% 1.5%
Median Age 37.9 39.9 34.0 36.2
Sources:Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013.
B-1 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
In 2010, the median age in Cupertino was 39.9, an increase
from 37.9 in 2000. Santa Clara County experienced a
similar aging of its population during this time period, as
evidenced by an increase in the median age from 34.0 to
36.2 years.
Household Income
According to American Community Survey (ACS) estimates,
the median household income in Cupertino in 2011
was $124,825. This figure is significantly higher than the
estimated median household income of $89,064 for Santa
Clara County. Furthermore, 62.3 percent of Cupertino
households earned more than $100,000 in 2011, whereas
only 45.0 percent of Santa Clara households and 39.0
percent of Bay Area households fall into this income
category. On a per capita basis, Cupertino is also wealthier
than Santa Clara County. In 2011, the per capita income
in Cupertino was $51,965, compared to $40,698 in the
County. Table 2.3 summarizes the distribution of household
incomes for Cupertino, Santa Clara County, and the Bay
Area.
The Housing Element law establishes five income
categories according to Area Median Income (AMI) for
purposes of evaluating housing assistance needs:
Extremely Low Income (0-30 percent AMI)
Very Low Income (31-50 percent AMI)
Low Income (51-80 percent AMI)
Moderate Income (81-120 percent AMI)
Above Moderate Income (>120 percent AMI)
1 Median household income and per capita income data are calculated fields
by the Census Bureau based on raw data from the American Community
Surveys.Without access to the raw data, median and per capita income can-
not be calculated for customized region not identified as a Census Designated
Place.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B•1 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
The State and Federal governments classify household
income into various groups based upon its relationship to
the County AMI and adjusted for household size. in 2010,
79.2 percent of Cupertino households earned moderate
or above-moderate incomes, and only 20.8 percent of
households earned lower incomes (see Table 2.4).2 In
comparison, 67.6 percent of County households earned
moderate or above-moderate incomes and 32.4 percent
earned lower incomes, including 12.6 percent who earned
extremely low incomes.
2.3 Employment Trends & Jobs/Housing Balance
Local Employment Opportunities
Since 2000 there has been a net increase of over 1,200 jobs
held by Cupertino residents, for a total of 25,200 employed
residents in 2011. As shown in Table 2.5, the number of
jobs held by Cupertino residents grew by 5.2 percent
between 2000 and 2011. The City of Cupertino job growth
percentage was far greater than the growth experienced by
Santa Clara County as a whole at 0.8 percent between 2000
and 2011.
Despite this overall growth, most industry sectors
experienced a decline in the number of jobs available.
Between 2000 and 2011 the largest job losses in
employment occurred in the manufacturing and retail
trade sectors. These decreases were offset by growth in
the professional, scientific, management, administrative,
and waste management services industry, which added
1,748 jobs, and the educational, health, and social services
industry, which added 1,144 jobs. Even with the recent
changes to employment sectors during the previous
decade, manufacturing remains the largest job sector for
residents of both Cupertino and Santa Clara County. As
2 Data were obtained from the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
CHAS)prepared for HUD by the Census Bureau using 2006-2010 American
Community Survey(ACS)data.
g- $ HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
1
rr*. . 9r;r-,rr;
e r. +' . i
i..,.-..'..;Sii:•....... R....dii::...i-"'e .'11i5iir-atY`W 1 31"', ''
Y
Less than $24,999 1,844 9.1% 79,057 13.2% 404,254 15.7%
25,000 to $49,999 1,933 9.6% 90,027 15.0% 440,575 17.1%
50,000 to $74,999 1,965 9.7% 84,594 14.1% 403,087 15.6%
75,000 to $99,999 1,874 9.3% 75,974 12.7% 324,123 12.6%
100,000 or more 12,560 62.3% 269,998 45.0% 1,005,441 39.0%
Total 20,176 100.0% 599,652 100.0%2,577,480 100.0%
Median Household 124,825 89,064 b
Income
Per Capita Income 51,965 40,698 b
Notes:
a)Alameda,Contra Costa, Marin, Napa,San Francisco,San Mateo,$anta Clara,Solano,and Sonoma Counties.
b)Median income data cannot be calculated from the ACS for Bay Area.
Source:Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles,December 2013.
1 #
e f-,:..L • ' • •
Extremely Low (30% or 1,485 7.6% 75,395 12.6%less)
Very Low (31 to 50%)1,320 6.7% 61,830 10.4%
Low (51 to 80%) 1,260 6.4% 56,325 9.4%
Moderate or Above 15,515 79.2% 403,195 67.6%over 80%)
100,000 or more 19,580 100.0% 596,745 100.0%
Total 20,176 100.0%599,652 100.0%
Source: Department of Housrng and Urban Development(HUD), ComPrehensive Housing Affordability Strategy(CHAS), based on
American Community Survey(ACS),2006-2010. Note:Data sources differ in Tables 2.3 and 2.4 resulting in slight deviations in totals.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT NOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cuperti o
of 2011, manufacturing jobs comprise 28.1 percent of
all jobs held by Cupertino residents and 19.6 percent of
jobs held by residents of Santa Clara County overall. The
manufacturing sector includes the production of computer,
electronic, and communication equipment, with such major
employers as Apple and Hewlett-Packard.
With the 2008-2012 collapse of the financial and credit
markets and the worldwide recession, Cupertino and the
broader Silicon Valley region lost some of the gains in key
sectors that were achieved between 2003 and 2007. The
impacts of the economic downturn, although serious, were
somewhat localized to particular sectors and industries such
as construction, manufacturing, and retail/wholesale trade.
Fortunately for Cupertino, high-tech employment did not
decline at the same rate as the rest of the economy, and
long-term prospects for this sector remain strong.
Unemployment
According to unemployment data provided by the State
of California Employment Development Department, as of
February 2014, the City of Cupertino had an unemployment
rate of approximately 3.9 percent. The unemployment rate
for the City was less than that of the County as a whole
6.1 percent). Since 2008, the unemployment rate has
remained stable in both the City and the County, which
had unemployment rates of 3.8 percent and 6.0 percent,
respectively, at that time.
Long-term Projections
Table 2.6 presents population, household, and job growth
projections for Cupertino, Santa Clara County, and the
nine-county Bay Area region between 2010 and 2040. The
figures represent the analysis conducted by the Association
of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) using 2010 Census data
and a variety of local sources.
g_2 p HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEfV1ENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
1 1 1 1
T
7 k 1 8 .:.; !i ..3
3 '•^_.. .,: i , 'fM, ;H A u w r
ca`uuJiNyla u^',`SC 1 v,
W' .,
Q';,.-
l+•i.i i
f
Agriculture
forestry, fishing 6 0.3%36 0.1% -52.6% 4,364 0.5% 4,425 0.5% 1.4%and hunting, and
mining
Construction 642 2.7% 420 1.7% -34.6% 42,232 5.0% 47,005 5.5% 11.3%
Manufacturing 7,952 33.2% 7,077 28.1% -11.0% 231,784 27.5% 167,034 19.6% -27.9%
Wholesale trade 628 2.6% 545 2.2% -13.2% 25,515 3.0% 20,252 2.4% -20.6%
Retail trade 2,056 8.6% 1,540 6.1% -25.1% 83,369 9.9% 81,918 9.6% -1.7%
Transportation
and warehousing, 383 1.6% 425 1.7% 11.0% 23,546 2.8% 23,578 2.8% 0.1%
and utilities
Information 1,462 6.1% 1,370 5.4% -6.3% 39,098 4.6% 32,627 3.8% -16.6%
Finance,
insurance, real 1,246 5.2% 1,368 5.4% 9.8% 38,715 4.6% 44,015 5.2% 13.7%
estate, and rental
and leasing
Professional,
scientific,
mana ement,
administrative, 4,667 19.5% 6,415 25.5% 37.5% 131,015 15.5% 152,960 18.0% 16.7%
and waste
management
services
Educational,
health, and social 3,063 12.8% 4,207 16.7% 37.3% 123,890 14.7% 157,349 18.5% 27.0%
services
Arts,
entertainment,
recreation,832 3.5% 734 2.9% -11.8% 49,186 5.8% 60,638 7.1% 23.3%
accommodation,
and food services
Other services
except public 590 2.5% 715 2.8% 21.2% 29,987 3.6% 36,330 4.3% 21.2%
administration)
Public 362 1.5%351 1.4% -3.0% 21,211 2.5% 22,421 2.6% 5.7%administration
Total 23,959 100.0% 25,203 100.0% 5.2% 843,912 100.0% 850,552 100.0% 0.8%
Source:Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g_2
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Cupertino`s population is expected to grow by 12,898
residents-from 58,302 in 2010 to 71,200 in 2040. This
translates into an increase of 22 percent over 30 years.
ABAG projects both Santa Clara County and the ABAG
region to experience much larger growth (36 percent
and 31 percent over 30 years, respectively). Specifically,
communities with lower housing costs have been
experiencing influxes of residents in search of comparative
affordable housing. As a community with high costs of
housing, Cupertino has not experienced an influx of
residents. Instead, Cupertino's job growth is expected to
continue to outpace population and household growth
in Cupertino between 2010 and 2020, compounding the
jobs rich" nature of the City, resulting in a jobs-to-housing
ratio of 1.40 by 2020 (up from 1.29 in 2010) but mirroring
the regional average of 1.40. Furthermore, job growth is
projected to level off after 2020 to a comparable pace with
population and household growth. Similar trends are also
projected for the County and the ABAG region as a whole.
i t .r u t 'i z . -
City of Cupertino
Population 58,302 62,100 66,300 71,200 6.5% 6.8% 7.4%
Households 20,181 21,460 22,750 24,040 6.3% 6.0% 5.7%
Jobs 26,090 29,960 31,220 33,110 14.8% 4.2% 6.1%
Santa Clara County
Population 1,781,642 1,977,900 2,188,500 2,423,500 11.0% 10.6% 10.7%
Households 604,204 675,670 747,070 818,400 11.8% 10.6% 9.5%
Jobs 926,270 1,091,270 1,147,020 1,229,520 17.8% 5.1% 7.2%
Bay Area a
Population 6,432,288 7,011,700 7,660,700 8,394,700 9.0% 9.3% 9.6%
Households 2,350,186 2,560,480 2,776,640 2,992,990 8.9% 8.4% 7.8%
Jobs 3,040,110 3,579,600 3,775,080 4,060,160 17.7% 5.5% 7.6%
Nptes:
a Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma Counties. Source:Association of Bay Area
Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013.
g_2 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
2.4 Housing Stock Characteristics
Housing Stock Conditions
The age of the housing stock in Cupertino is similar to that
of Santa Clara County. As shown in Table 2.7, the largest
proportion of homes in the city (26.7 percent) was built
between 1960 and 1969. In both Cupertino and Santa Clara
County, 1972 is the median year housing structures were
built.
Typically, unless carefully maintained, older housing
can create health, safety, and welfare problems for its
occupants. Even with normal maintenance, dwellings over
40 years of age can deteriorate and require significant
rehabilitation. However, while Cupertino's housing stock
is older, most homes remain in relatively good condition,
a testament to the relative wealth of the community and
pride of home ownership.
Data on the number of units which lack complete plumbing
and kitchen facilities are often used to assess the condition
of a jurisdiction's housing stock. As Table 2.8 indicates,
virtually all housing units contain complete plumbing and
kitchen facilities. The 2007-2011 ACS indicates that less
than one percent of the units lack these facilities.
To characterize the physical conditions of Cupertino's
stock of older residential structures, a windshield survey
was performed in 2009-2010 (inspecting exterior building
components visible from the public right-of-way only). The
windshield survey was conducted for the Rancho Rinconada
residential neighborhood in the eastern part of Cupertino.
This neighborhood, which is bordered by Lawrence
Expressway, Bollinger Road, Miller Avenue, and Stevens
Creek Boulevard, is one of the city's older neighborhoods,
with many small, single-story homes built in the 1950s.
The windshield survey reported on the exterior condition
of the housing units in this neighborhood, including a
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 8 -2 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
review of each unit's foundation, roofing, siding and/or
stucco, and windows. The survey concluded that over half
of the several dozen homes surveyed had shingles missing
from the roof, while nearly all had siding or stucco that
needed to be patched and repainted. Many of the homes
surveyed were characterized by a lack of maintenance, with
overgrown yards or garbage and debris on the property. No
significant changes in the market conditions have occurred
since the survey in 2009-2010 to have impacted the
housing conditions in this neighborhood. The City offers
rehabilitation assistance to lower and moderate income
households to make necessary repairs and improvements.
The City also operates a Code Enforcement program that
is primarily complaint/response driven. Between 2009 and
2014, Code Enforcement staff investigated over 1,200
code violations. During investigation of complaints, Code
Enforcement officers assess the primary complaint as well
as other visible code violations. Based on recent statistics
on code enforcement activities, typical code violations
in the City include dilapidated structures, trash and
debris, hazardous vegetation, and exterior storage. Most
violations are able to be resolved within a relatively short
timeframe. Depending on the type of code violations, Code
Enforcement officers would refer homeowners to the City's
rehabilitation programs for assistance. Households are not
displaced due to code enforcement activities unless there
is a critical health and safety issue present. Since 2007, an
estimated three residential units have been deemed unsafe
due to health and safety issues.
g_2 q HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
1 i !
m .e a;4,v..me.i;:::,...r,..x,.:_.._ y -
M,ati.b'ro ur a rrrkti r
Y 1 ^.': _ • M' . s '
Built 2000 to Later 1,638 7.8% 59,880 9.5%
Built 1990 to 1999 2,520 12.0% 63,429 10.1%
Built 1980 to 1989 2,920 13.9% 79,409 12.6%
Built 1970 to 1979 4,374 20.8%143,847 22.9%
Built 1960 to 1969 5,619 26.7%121,349 19.3%
Built 1950 to 1959 3,216 15.3%100,795 16.0%
Built 1940 to 1949 539 2.6% 27,495 4.4%
Built 1939 or earlier 232 1.1% 33,244 5.3%
Total 21,058 100.0% 629,448 100.0%
Median Year Built 1972 1972
Source:Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013.
Distribution of Units by Structure Type
As shown in Table 2.9, a majority of housing units in
Cupertino are single-family detached homes. As of 2013,
57.3 percent of total units in the City of Cupertino were
single-family detached dwelling units (a decrease from the
61 percent recorded in 2000). As of 2013, the proportion of
single-family homes in the City of Cupertino is still greater
than Santa Clara County as a whole (54.1 percent) and the
Bay Area as a whole at 53.6 percent.
Large multi-family buildings (defined as units in structures
containing five or more dwellings) represent the second
largest housing category at 21.0 percent of the total
number of units in Cupertino as of 2013. As of 2013,
multi-family housing (5+ units) represented 25.5 percent of
housing units in Santa Clara County and 25.1 percent in the
Bay Area as a whole.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMEIVT B•2 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
i 1
x t;,
z-., r= . .r .:q:,.x
w.d _ .d's; .,,.. i l.d.^ak''_
Plumbing Facilities
Owners
Complete Plumbing Facilities 12,900 63.9%
Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities 61 0.3%
Renters
Complete Plumbing Facilities 7,215 35.8%
Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities 0 0.0%
Total 20,176 100.0%
Kitchen Facilities
Owners
Complete Kitchen Facilities 12,923 64.1%
Lacking Complete Kitchen Facilities 38 0.2%
Renters
Complete Kitchen Facilities 7,132 35.3%
Lacking Complete Kitchen Facilities 83 0.4%
Total 20,176 100.0%
Source:Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013.
Single-family attached homes comprised the third largest
housing category in Cupertino, at 12.2 percent in 2013.
By comparison, these homes made up 9.7 percent of the
housing stock in all of Santa Clara County and 9.2 percent
in the Bay Area as a whole. As of 2013, small multi-family
homes (defined as units in structures containing 2 to 4
dwellings) represented 9.5 percent in the City of Cupertino,
7.7 percent in Santa Clara County and 9.9 percent in the
Bay Area as a whole.
g_2 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Hous ng Element Technical Report
1 p
i3.,___. ..:_ . _.. ..._....... . ...:...... ...._:..:_,.._ ----... ;........ ....___. _ ,. _.__. .__.
a. c ,::
City of Cupertino
Single Family Detached 11,425 61.1% 12,056 57.3% 5.5%
Single Family Attached 2,028 10.8% 2,561 12.2% 26.3%
Multi-family 2-4 units 1,663 8.9% 2,002 9.5% 20.4%
Multi-family 5+ units 3,576 19.1% 4,422 21.0% 23.7%
Mobile Homes 9 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0%
Total 18,701 100.0% 21,041 100.0% 12.5%
Santa Clara County
Single Family Detached 323,913 55.9% 346,145 54.1% 6.9%
Single Family Attached 52,739 9.1% 62,201 9.7% 17.9%
Multi-family 2-4 units 46,371 8.0% 48,923 7.7% 5.5%
Multi-family 5+ units 136,628 23.6% 163,124 25.5% 19.4%
Mobile Homes 19,678 3.4% 19,053 3.0% 3.2%
Total 579,329 100.0%639,446 100.0% 10.4%
Bay Area
Single Family Detached 1,376,861 53.9% 1,505,153 53.6% 9.3%
Single Family Attached 224,824 8.8% 258,633 9.2% 15.0%
Multi-family 2-4 units 266,320 10.4% 278,450 9.9% 4.6%
Multi-family 5+ units 623,388 24.4% 705,899 25.1% 13.2%
Mobile Homes 61,011 2.4% 59,673 2.1% 2.2%
Total 2,552,404 100.0% 2,807,808 100.0% 10.0%
Source:Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 8-2 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Overcrowding
Overcrowding refers to a household with an average of
more than one person per room (including bedrooms and
dining rooms but not kitchens or bathrooms). Units with
more than 1.5 persons per room are considered to be
severely overcrowded. As shown in Table 2.10, as of 2011
the total percentage of overcrowding by tenure represented
5.2 percent for Cupertino households, which is slightly
lower compared to 7.2 percent in Santa Clara County.
Overcrowding was much more common in Cupertino's
renter-occupied households, with 10.7 percent of these
households considered to be overcrowded. By comparison,
only 2.2 percent of owner-occupied households in the city
were overcrowded. In Santa Clara County, 3.4 percent of
owner-occupied households experienced overcrowding
versus 12.5 percent of renter-households. Overcrowding
conditions in Cupertino approximate regional averages,
with a slightly higher level of overcrowding among renter-
households than in the region.
2.5 Market Conditions & Income Related to
Housing Costs
This section of the Needs Assessment provides information
on market conditions for housing in Cupertino. This
information is important because it reveals the extent to
which the private housing market is providing for the needs
of various economic segments of the local population.
Available data on housing market conditions are combined
with information on the demographics of the local
population to identify those segments of the population
that may face difficulties in securing affordable housing in
Cupertino.
g_2 g HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Hous ng Element Technical Report
i i R # N 1
r
i ' a -
Cupertino
1.51 or more persons per room 39 0.3% 73 1.0% 112 0.6%Severely Overcrowded)
1.01 to 1.50 (Overcrowded) 246 1.9% 700 9.7% 946 4.7%
1.00 or Less 12,676 97.8% 6,442 89.3% 19,118 94.8%
Total 12,961 100.0% 7,215 100.0%20,176 100.0%
Overcrowded by Tenure 2.2% 10.7%5.2%
anta Clara County
1.51 or more persons per room 2,755 0.8% 11,799 4.8% 14,554 2.4%Severely Overcrowded)
1.01 to 1.50(Overcrowded) 9,136 2.6% 19,213 7.8% 28,349 4.7%
1.00 or Less 340,006 96.6% 216,743 87.5% 556,749 92.8%
Total 351,897 100.0% 247,755 100.0% 599,652 100.0%
Overcrowded by Tenure 3.4% 12.5%7.2%
AB G:ftg on:
1.51 or more persons per room 9,620 0.7% 40,161 3.6% 49,781 1.9%Severely Overcrowded)
1.01 to 1.50(Overcrowded) 32,632 2.2% 63,188 5.7% 95,820 3.7%
1.00 or Less 1,434,779 97.1% 997,100 90.6%2,431,879 94.4%
Total 1,477,031 100.0% 1,100,449 100.0% 2,577,480 100.0%
Overcrowded by Tenure 2.9% 9.4% 5.6%
Notes:
1)State HCD defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more(excluding bathrooms and kitchen). Units with more than 1.5 persons
2Per
room are considered severely overcrowded.
The 2010 Census does not contain detailed data on household conditions. Overcrowding data in this table are based on the American Community
Survey(ACS), which is comprised of a series of small surveys forjurisdictions taken at different intervals based on population size. The 2000 Census
overcrowding data were developed based on the 100 percent survey. Therefore, the significant changes between the 2000 Census and ACS may due
in part to actual changes in overcrowding conditions,and in part to different survey methodologies.
Sources: U.S. Census,American Community Survey(ACS), 2007-201 1.
HCD REVIEbYED DRAh=T HOUSING ELENIENI 2 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Rental Market Characteristics and Trends
A review of rental market conditions in Cupertino was
conducted for this Housing Element by reviewing
advertised apartment listings. As shown in Table 2.11, a
total of 170 units were listed, the majority of which were
one- and two-bedroom units. The survey found that market-
rate rents averaged:
1,608 per month for studio units
2,237 per month for one-bedroom units
2,886 per month for two-bedroom units
3,652 per month for three-bedroom units
Rental prices in Cupertino ranged from $1,400 for a studio
unit to $5,895 for a five-bedroom unit. As can be expected,
smaller units are more affordable than larger units. The
overall median rental price for all unit sizes was $2,830, and
the average price was $2,919.
Studio 5 1,559 1,608 1,400-$1,800
One-Bedroom 44 2,274 2,237 1,845-$2,567
Two-Bedroom 80 2,844 2,886 1,950-$3,820
Three-Bedroom 33 3,500 3,652 2,600-$4,595
Four-Bedroom b 4,999 4,683 3,700-$5,300
Five-Bedroom 2 5,198 5,198 4,500-$5,895
Total 170 2,830 2,919 1,400-$5,895
Note:Search performed on Craigslist.org and Zillow.com of listings dated February 12 to March 7, 2014. Sources: Craigslist.org,2014;
Zillow.com, 2014.
B-3 0 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Home Sale Trends
While other areas of the state and nation have experienced
downturns in the housing market recently, Cupertino home
values have continued to grow. During the depth of the
housing market crash (between 2008 and 2010), median
home price in Cupertino held steady at around $1,000,000.
Since 2011, home prices in Cupertino have increased
substantially. According to DQNews, the median sales price
for single-family residences and condos increased by 28.6
percent from $933,000 in 2011 to $1,200,000 in 2013. As
shown in Table 2.12, this increase was one of the highest in
the region. Median home prices in Santa Clara County as a
whole increased even more dramatically (by 36.5 percent)
during the same time period. Figure B-1 shows that the
City of Cupertino had the second highest median home
sales price in the region during 2013 at $1,200,000, behind
only the City of Saratoga at $1,600,000. The 2013 median
home sales price of $1,200,000 in Cupertino was also
nearly double that of the County median price ($645,000).
Most recent sales data reported by DQNews.com compare
sales records in the month of March 2014 with those in
March 2013. Prices in Santa Clara County experienced
a 15 percent increase over that one-year period, while
Milpitas and Cupertino registered the largest increases
in the County at 36 percent and 31 percent, respectively.
Throughout 2014, Cupertino's median home sale price
has continued on this upward trend—as of June 2014,
the median single-family home price in Cupertino was
1,550,000 and a townhome/condominium was selling for
822,500.
While home prices in the city steadily increased, the
number of homes being sold declined slightly between
2012 and 2013, from 530 units to 512 units (Figure B-2).
Neighboring jurisdictions also experienced similar declines
in sales volume, with the largest decrease occurring in
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-3 1
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
i t
1 1 1
1 M 1 1
Campbell 569,000 625,000 701,000 9.8% 12.2% 23.2%
Cupertino 933,000 1,045,750 $1,200,000 12.1% 14.8% 28.6%
Mountain 678,500 769,250 800,000 13.4% 4.0% 17.9%
View
Santa Clara 500,000 540,000 635,000 8.0% 17.6% 27.0%
Saratoga 1,377,500 $1,527,500 $1,600,000 10.9% 4.7% 16.2%
Sunnyvale 570,000 645,000 767,500 13.2% 19.0% 34.6%
Santa Clara 472,500 525,000 645,000 11.1% 22.9% 36.5%
County
Source: DQNews.com,2014.
Figure B-1
Annual Median Home Sale Price, 2013
1,600,000
1,400,000
1,200,000
1,000,000
Santa Clara County:$645,000
800,000 1,600,000
I—
600,000 1,200,000
400,000 800,000 767,500
701,000 635,000
200,000
0
i_._
Campbell Cupertino Nbuntain Santa Clara Saratoga Sunnyvale
g_3 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Mountain View. Overall, the number of units sold in the
County decreased slightly from 20,940 units in 2012 to
20,700 units in 2013, according to DQNews.com.
Vacancy Rates and Trends
The 2010 Census data as reported in ABAG's Housing
Element Data Profiles indicate an overall vacancy rate of 4.0
percent in the City, which was slightly lower than the Santa
Clara County vacancy rate of 4.4 percent (see Table 2.13).
Specifically, Cupertino's rental vacancy rate was reported
at 4.7 percent, compared to a vacancy rate of less than
one percent (0.8 percent) for ownership housing. While the
rental vacancy rate increased notably from the 1.8 percent
reported by the 2000 Census, the homeowner vacancy rate
stayed essentially the same. Despite the increase, the loca)
vacancy rates were still below optimum. Typically, industry
standards consider a rental vacancy rate of five to six
percent and a vacancy rate for ownership housing of one to
two percent to be adequate to facilitate mobility.
Housing Affordability
According to the federal government, housing is
considered "affordable" if it costs no more than 30 percent
of a household's gross income. Often, affordable housing
is discussed in the context of affordability to households
with different income levels. Households are categorized
as extremely low income, very low income, low income,
median income, moderate income, or above moderate
income based on percentages of the AMI established
annually by the California Department of Housing and
Community Development. Income limits also vary by
household size. Table 2.14 provides the maximum income
limits for a four-person household in Santa Clara County in
2014. Extremely low-, very low- and low-income households
are eligible for federal, state, and local affordable housing
programs. Moderate-income households are eligible for
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B -3 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
some state and local housing programs. These income
categories are also used by ABAG in the Regional Housing
Needs Allocation, or RHNA, process. In Cupertino, the
Below Market Rate (BMR) Ordinance establishes an
additional income range: median income (81 -100 percent
of AM I).
Another way to think of the household income categories
is to consider what types of jobs people in these different
categories might have. Figure B-3 provides representative
households in Santa Clara County, along with hypothetical
jobs and family compositions.
Ability to Purchase/Rent Homes by
Household Income
Table 2.15 shows affordability scenarios by income and
household size for Santa Clara County. The following
analysis compares the maximum affordable housing costs
Figure B-2
Home Sales Volume, 2012 - 2013
1,500
1,000
500
z,
a
Campbell Cupertino
Mountain
Santa Clara Saratoga Sunnyvale
V ew
02012 555 530 849 1,176 480 1,208
a 2013 554 512 759 1,214 448 1,326
B-3 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
t 9 t
T l:-is.j'.R .
Occupied 20,181 96.0% 604,204 95.6% 12,577,498 91.9%Housing Units
Vacant 846 4.0% 27,716 4.4% 1,102,583 8.1%
For Rent 373 1.8% 11,519 1.8% 374,610 2.7%
For Sale Only 108 0.5% 5,067 0.8% 154,775 1.1%
Rented Or Sold, b 0.4% 2,222 0.4% 54,635 0.4%Not Occupied
For Seasonal,
Recreational, or 125 0.6% 3,000 0.5% 302,815 2.2%
Occasional Use
For Migrant 3 0.0% 50 0.0% 2,100 0.0%Workers
Other Vacant (a) 161 0.8% 5,858 0.9% 213,648 1.6%
Total 21,027 100.0% 631,920 100.0% 13,680,081 100.0%
Homeowner p go o 1.4% 2.1%Vacancy Rate
Rental Vacancy 4% 4.3% 6.3%Rate
Notes:
a)If a vacant unit does not fall into any of the classifications specified above, it is classified as "other vacant."For example, this category
includes units held for occupancy by a caretaker orjanitor,and units held by the owner for personal reasons. Source:Association of
Bay Area Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 8•3 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
for various households to the rental survey and median
home sales price data for Cupertino shown earlier. The
maximum affordable sales price was calculated using
household income limits published by the California
Department of Housing and Community Development,
conventional financing terms, and assuming that
households spend 30-35 percent of gross income on
mortgage payments, taxes, and insurance.
When comparing the home prices and rents shown earlier
in Table 2.11 and Table 2.12 with the maximum affordable
housing costs presented in Table 2.15, it is evident
that extremely low- and very low-income households
in Cupertino have no affordable housing options. For
example, a four-person very low income household could
afford $1,084 a month for rent, but the average rent for
a two-bedroom unit was $2,886, more than double what
this household could afford. Even for low- and moderate-
income households, adequately sized and affordable rental
housing options are very limited. A four-person moderate
income household could afford $2,928 monthly for rent,
barely above the average rent of a two-bedroom unit.
Homeownership is generally beyond the reach of most
lower- and moderate-income households.
s
Extremely Low Income 0% to 30%31,850
Very Low Income 31% to 50% 53,050
Low Income 51% to 80% 84,900
Moderate Income 81%to 120% 126,600
Santa Clara Median Income 100% 105,500
Notes:
a)Based on HCD 2014 Household Income Limits for households of four persons in Santa Ciara County.
Source: California Department of Housing and Community Development,2014.
B-3 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Figure B-3
Representative Households, Santa Clara
County, 2014
Moderate Income Household(80%—120%AMI)
Estimated Annual Income:
84,900-$126,000
Dad works as a paralegal,mom works
as a home health aide;they have two
children.
Low Income Household(50%—80%AMI)
Estimated Annual Income:
53,050-$84,900
Dad works as a security guard,mom
works as a teaching assistant;they have
two chiidren.
Very Low Income Household(Up to 50%AMI)
Estimated Annual Income:
Up to$42,050
Mom works as a file clerk and is the only
source of financial support in her family;
she has one child.
Sources:California Employment and Development Department,2014;and
California Department of Housing and Community Development,2014.
As shown in Table 2.15, a four-person moderate income
household could afford a home of approximately $625,800,
just about half the price of a median-priced home in
Cupertino.
To augment this analysis, the household incomes of select
occupations were analyzed to evaluate these workers'
ability to rent or purchase homes in Cupertino. Figure B-4
shows the average annual wages for a range of occupations
in Santa Clara County, based on 2013 State Employment
Development Department occupational employment and
wage data. In general, low-paying occupations in the
health care support and food preparation industries do not
pay salaries high enough to allow their workers to afford
housing in Cupertino. In addition, while those employed in
higher-paying occupations may earn more, they may still
have difficulty purchasing an adequately sized home.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g.3 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
F 'd. 1
i
K :.,...i:. ,.. . K':.. .
Extremely Low Income(0-30%AMI)
1-Person 22,300 558 558 137 149 195 421 41,840
2-Person 25,500 638 638 160 173 223 478 47,330
3-Person 28,650 716 716 182 198 251 534 52,465
4 Person 31,850 796 796 242 265 279 554 49,524
5 Person 34,400 860 860 290 316 301 570 47,649
Very Low Income (31-50%AMI)
1-Person 37,150 929 929 137 149 325 792 89,158
2-Person 42,450 1,061 1,061 160 173 371 901 101,340
3-Person 47,750 1,194 1,194 182 198 418 1,012 $113,325
4 Person 53,050 1,326 1,326 242 265 464 1,084 $117,076
5 Person 57,300 1,433 1,433 290 316 501 1,143 $120,617
Low Income (51-80% AMI)
1-Person 59,400 1,108 1,292 137 149 452 973 135,504
2-Person 67,900 1,266 1,477 160 173 517 1,106 $154,329
3-Person 76,400 1,424 1,662 182 198 582 1,242 $172,959
4 Person 84,900 1,583 1,846 242 265 646 1,341 $183,353
5 Person 91,650 1,709 1,994 290 316 698 1,419 $192,177
Median Income (81-100%AMI)
1-Person 73,850 1,662 1,939 137 149 678 1,525 $217,864
2-Person 84,400 1,899 2,216 160 173 775 1,739 $248,456
3-Person 94,950 2,136 2,492 182 198 872 1,954 $278,851
4 Person 105,500 2,374 2,769 242 265 969 2,132 $301,010
5 Person 113,950 2,564 2,991 290 316 1,047 2,274 $319,248
Moderate Income(101-120%AMI)
1-Person 88,600 2,031 2,369 137 149 829 1,894 $272,771
2-Person 101,300 2,321 2,708 160 173 948 2,161 $311,206
3-Person 113,950 2,611 3,046 182 198 1,066 2,429 $349,445
4 Person 126,600 2,901 3,385 242 265 1,185 2,659 $379,449
5 Person 136,750 3,133 3,656 290 316 1,279 2,843 $403,961
Notes:
a)This table is intended for general information purposes only.Any proposed BMR unit initial sales prices shall be determined by the City based on
Health and Safety Code requirements and available interest rates/conditions at the time of sale. (b)Assumptions for rental scenarios:2014 HCD income
limits;affordable housing costs pursuant to California Health&Safety Code Section 50053(b)(1)(2)(3)(4);utilities based on Housing Authority of Santa
Clara 2013 County Utility Allowance (c)Assumptions for ownership scenarios:2014 HCD income limits;affordable housing costs pursuant to California
Health&Safety Code Section 50052.5(b)(1)(2)(3)(4);35%of monthly affordable cost for taxes, insurance, monthly mortgage insurance and HOA dues;5%
downpayment, 5%interest rate;conventional 30 year fixed rate mortgage loan;utilities based on Housing Authority of Santa Clara 2013 County Utility
Allowance.Sources: California Department of Housing and Community Development,2014;California Health&Safety Code,2014; Housing Authority of
the County of Santa Clara,2013; Veronica Tam and Associates,2014.
B-3 8 HCD REvIEWED I RAFT HOUSING ELENiENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Tech ical Report
Overpayment (Cost Burden)
According to Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) standards, a household is considered
to be "cost-burdened" (i.e. overpaying for housing) if it
spends more than 30 percent of gross income on housing-
related costs. Households are "severely cost burdened" if
they pay more than 50 percent of their income on housing
cost. According to special data developed by the ACS for
HUD, approximately 30 percent of renters and 37 percent
of homeowners in Cupertino were overpaying for housing
in 2010. By contrast, overpayment was much more common
in Santa Clara County as a whole, with 42 percent of renters
and 39 percent of homeowners classified as cost-burdened
in 2010.
Housing cost burden was particularly pronounced for
extremely low- and very low-income households in
Cupertino. In 2010, 51 percent of Cupertino's extremely
low-income renters and 37 percent of its very low-income
renters were severely cost burdened. This finding is
consistent with the analysis of the local housing market,
which revealed a significant gap between home prices and
rents and the income of lower income households.
Figure B-4
Income Needed to Afford Housing Compared with Income
300,000
Income Needed to Buy a Home
299,555)
250,000
200,000
152,925
150,000
106,995 Income Needed to Rent an Apt.
100,000
135,840
59,719
l
554.296'
50,000
5.,5 00 I _ $
36,000
i 23,795
I
0 c:,,..;:. .:_: ::...,,
f.tanagen,ent Eng eering Education Protective Saies Healthcare Food Prep
Services Support
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-3 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupertino
E i
E @!' ar';-. a _
v
ir-,,,.,:,. ,.:.. ; .::. ..,,. f!t
i , i
1j •
n F,: .A'AI;Y:' 1`^.... . ... . '-._ X ,R.,:_ rA4'...m.. .., a.E..YZ . . a a+.4..
Extremely Low 300 310 10 820 370 10 665 1,485
0-30%)
With any housing 61.7% 69.4% 100.0% 64.6% 55.4% 100.0% 61.7% 63.3%
problem
With cost burden 61.7% 69.4% 100.0% 64.6% 55.4% 100.0% 61.7% 63.3%
30%
With cost burden 45.0% 62.9% 100.0% 56.1% 27.0% 100.0% 44.4% 50.8%
50%
Very Low(31-50%)75 300 25 485 555 40 835 1,320
With any housing 100.0% 70.0% 100.0% 81.4% 35.1% 100.0% 44.9% 58.3%
problem
With cost burden 100.0% 70.0% 40.0% 79.4% 36.0% 100.0% 45.5% 58.0%
30%
With cost burden 60.0% 30.0% 40.0% 43.3% 27.9% 100.0% 32.9% 36.7%
50%
Low (51-80%) 55 150 55 450 500 30 810 1,260
With any housing 100.0% 76.7% 100.0% 76.7% 31.0%0.0%45.7% 56.7%
problem
With cost burden 100.0% 66.7% 90.9% 72.2% 31.0%0.0%42.6% 53.2%
30%
With cost burden 100.0% 43.3% 72.7% 46.7% 21.0%0.0%30.2% 36.1%
50%
Moderate/Above 265 3,515 385 5,170 1,990 1,025 10,345 15,515
Moderate (>80%)
VVith any housing 47.2% 24.9% 66.2% 28J% 22.9% 40.0% 35.5% 33.3%
problem
With cost burden 47.2% 12.8%0.0%15.6% 21.4% 33.2% 33.7% 27.7%
30%
With cost burden 11.3%0.0% 0.0% 0.6% 7.0% 2.4% 7.5% 5.2%
50%
Total Households 695 4,275 475 6,925 3,415 1,105 12,655 19,580
With any housing 63.3% 33.1% 72.6% 39.8% 29.6% 41.6% 38.2% 38.7%
problem
With cost burden 63.3% 22.8% 14.7% 29.5% 28.8% 35.3% 36.5% 34.0%
30%
With cost burden 38.1%8.2%12.6% 13.1% 14.6%6.8%12.6% 12.8%
50%
Notes:
a)Data presented in this table are based on special tabulations from 2006-2010 American Community Survey(ACS)data. Due to the small sample
size, the margins for error can be significant. Interpretations of these data should focus on the proportion of households in need of assistance
rather than on precise numbers.
Source: HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy(CHAS),based on the 2006-2010 ACS.
B-40 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
2.6. Assisted Housing at Risk of Conversion
State law requires local housing elements to include an
inventory of affordable housing developments that could
be at risk of conversion to market rates during the 10-year
period that follows the adoption of the element. For those
units found to be at risk of conversion, the element must
estimate the cost to preserve or replace the at-risk units, to
identify the resources available to help in the preservation
or replacement of those units, and to identify those
organizations that could assist in these efforts.
Inventory of Existing Affordable Units
Table 2.17 presents the inventory of affordable housing
units in Cupertino and indicates the earliest dates of
termination of affordability restrictions for each project. In
2011, the 10 below market rate (BMR) units in the Chateau
Cupertino development expired. However, the City is
committed to maintaining the long-term affordability of
current BMR units. As such, in 2005 the City increased
the minimum affordability term for BMR units in new
developments to 99 years. Since 2010, 17 new units at
the Markham Apartments have been added to the BMR
inventory.
Units at Risk of Conversion During Next Ten
Years
The affordable housing developments at risk of conversion
to market rate during the next 10 years include those units
whose affordability restrictions are set to expire January 31,
2025 or earlier. As presented in Table 2.17, the affordability
restrictions for the eight-unit Beardon Drive project will
expire in December 2024. In addition, certain affordability
restrictions for Le Beaulieu Apartments are also set to
expire during the next 10 years.
Cupertino Community Housing originally developed Le
Beaulieu in 1984 and utilized HUD project-based Section
8 assistance. Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition, a nonprofit
organization, acquired and rehabilitated the project in
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g.q
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
1998. Le Beaulieu contains 27 one- and two-bedroom
units for adults with physical disabilities who are able to
live independently. All units are handicap accessible and
affordable to very low-income households (less than 50
percent of AM I).
The Le Beaulieu development is not considered to be at
risk of converting to market rate because there are other
funding sources tied to the property such as the City's
CDBG (30-year agreement) and CaIHFA loan agreement.
y
y.
ts s s S !.' '.g... .
Affordable Developments
Sunny View
West 22449 100 100 0 HUD 202/811 3/31/2031
Cupertino Rd.
Stevens Creek
Village
40 40 0
CHFA, HUD &
b/30/2035
19140 Stevens HOME
Creek Blvd.
Le Beaulieu
Apartments
2 2 p CaIFHA/CDBG
2035
10092 Bianchi 9/12/2015
Way
WVCS
Transitional
Housing 4 4 0 CDBG 7/14/2026
10311-10321
Greenwood Ct.
Beardon Drive
10192-10194 8 8 0 CDBG 12/21/2024
Beardon Dr.
Senior Housing
Solutions
1 0 CDBG 6/242066
19935 Price
Avenue
Maitri
Transitional
Housing 4 4 0 CDBG 3/16/2064
Undisclosed
Location
Total 184 184 0
g_q 2 HCD REVIEWEU DRAFT HOUSiNv ELEMENI
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
k Y c1'A.
I
Affordable Developments
Biltmore
Apartments
2 2 0 BMR 6/30/2029
10159 South
Blaney Ave.
Park Center
Apartments
4 4 0 BMR 7/8/2026
20380 Stevens
Creek Blvd.
The Hamptons
19500 34 34 0 BMR 10/20/2027
Pruneridge Ave.
Arioso
Apartments
20 20 0 BMR 1/29/2028
19608
Pruneridge Ave.
Forge-
Homestead
Apartments 15 15 0 BMR 1/16/2027
20691 Forge
Way
Aviare
Apartments
20 20 0 BMR 7/8/2026
20415 Via
Paviso
The Markham
Apartments
20800 17 17 0 BMR 2039
Homestead
Road
Lake Biltmore
19500 2 2 0 BMR 2029
Pruneridge Ave.
Vista Village
101144 Vista 24 24 0 BMR 11/29/2056
Drive
Total 138 138 0
Below Market Rate (BMR) For-Sale Units
Total (a) 122 0 122 BMR
Notes:
a)Property addresses of BMR units are not listed in order to protect the privacy of homeowners. Source:City of Cupertino, 2014.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-4 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupertino
In addition, Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition is committed
to maintaining the property as affordable. Discussions
with Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition staff in early 2014
confirmed the organization is in the process of applying for
a 20-year extension of the Section 8 contract. Renewal of
Section 8 funding for senior and disabled housing has been
prioritized by HUD and Mid-Peninsula Housing fully expects
to be able to extend the Section 8 assistance. Furthermore,
other affordability covenants on the project would require
the project to remain as affordable housing well beyond
this Housing Element planning period.
One property has been identified with expiring affordability
restriction during this planning period — the Beardon Drive
development. In 1994, Community Housing Developers
Inc., a nonprofit housing provider, received a loan from
the City's CDBG program for the acquisition of the
Beardon Drive property. The loan agreement restricts the
eight units for very low-income use for 30 years. As such,
income restriction for this project would expire in 2024. As
Beardon Drive is owned by a nonprofit housing provider, it
is considered to be at low risk of converting to market-rate
housing. Nevertheless, for the purpose of this Housing
Element, options and costs to preserve these units are
discussed below.
Preservation and Replacement Options
Typically, transferring the at-risk projects to nonprofit
ownership would ensure the long-term affordability of the
units. However, the Beardon Drive project is already owned
by a nonprofit organization. Beardon Drive does not rely
on ongoing rent subsidies (such as Section 8) to maintain
affordable rents. A strategy to preserving this project as
affordable housing is to ensure the financial status of the
project (i.e., net operating income and reserve) is adequate
to maintain the affordable rents. The City has included
a strategy in the Housing Plan to provide rehabilitation
B-4 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Hous ng Element Technical Report
assistance to affordable housing projects to upkeep
the housing quality standards and to reduce ongoing
maintenance and operating expenses. The City may also
choose to extend the loan repayment schedule in exchange
for an extended affordability covenant.
Another strategy is to provide ongoing rental subsidies
to the project. The estimated total amount needed to
subsidize rents for existing tenants is shown in Table 2.18.
Given the unit mix of all eight at-risk units, the total cost of
subsidizing the rents for these units is estimated at $61,152
annually. For a 10-year affordability covenant, a total
subsidy of more than $600,000 would be needed.
Construction of Replacement Units
In the unlikely event that Community Housing Developers,
Inc. chooses to convert Beardon Drive from an affordable
housing project to market-rate housing, the construction
of new affordable housing units as a means of replacing
the currently at-risk units may be an option for Cupertino.
The cost of developing housing depends upon a variety
of factors including the density and size of the units (i.e.
square footage and number of bedrooms), location,
land costs, and type of construction. Based on general
assumptions for average construction costs, it would cost
approximately $940,000 to construct eight affordable
replacement units, excluding land costs and other soft costs
such as architecture and engineering). When considering
these additional costs, especially given the high cost of
land in Cupertino, the total costs to develop replacement
units would be significantly higher.
Financial Resources Available to the City to
Assist in Preservation
Clearly, the costs of preserving or replacing affordable
housing units are substantial. In light of this challenge,
the City must consider what resources are available to
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-4 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
ij, a•`: .s
w ' .-_: ..,,w.. -.W' y. • . i r.1: :Y" '•
Very Low Income (50%AMI)
2-Bedroom/3- g 1,649 47,750 1,012 637 5,096.00
person household
Total Annual 61,152
Subsidy
Notes:
a)Fair Market Rent(FMR)is determined by HUD. These calculations use the 2014 HUD FMR for Santa Clara County.
b)Rents are restricted to 50%AMI for this development, which Puts residents in the Very Low Income Category, set by the California
Department of Housing and Community Development(HCD), 2014.
c)The afFordable housmg cost is calculated based on 30%of the AMI,minus utilities for rentals.
d) The monthly subsidy covers the gap between the FMR and the affordable housing cost Source: Ueronica Tam and Associates,2014.
i'
2 Bedroom 8 807 7,747 941,963
Average Per Unit Cost: 117,745
Notes:
C) _ (A)x(B)x 1.20(i.e. 20%inflation to account for hallways and other common areas). (D)_(C)
x$97.27(per square foot construction costs)x 1.25(i.e. 25%inflation to account for parking and
landscaping costs).Source: Veronica Tam and Associates, 2014
help preserve or replace those units so that lower-income
tenants are not displaced in the event that affordable units
convert to market rate. The City has access to a range of
different funds that could potentially assist in a preservation
effort, including:
City Below Market Rate (BMR) Affordable Housing Fund
AHF) (approximately $b million unencumbered as of
2014)
CDBG Entitlement Funds (approximately $150,000
unencumbered as of 2014)
B-4 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Santa Clara County HOME Consortium Funds (available
through a competitive application process after the City
joins the Consortium in 2014)
Mortgage Revenue Bonds
State Grant Programs
Federal Grant Programs
Low Income Housing Tax Credits
HUD Section 8 "Mark to Market" Program
Once the City becomes aware of an impending conversion,
staff will begin exploring the availability of funding
from various sources. In many cases, the City will find
it advantageous to collaborate with private afFordable
housing developers or managers to develop and implement
a viable plan to preserve affordable housing units. Private
developers can often bring additional expertise and access
to funding, such as tax credits. The State Department of
Housing and Community Development maintains a list
of affordable housing developers and property managers
who have expressed an interest in working with local
communities to preserve affordable housing projects. This
database lists organizations that are interested in working
in any county within the State of California, including
well-known affordable housing providers such as Mercy
Housing, EAH, MidPen Housing, etc. The database also
lists numerous organizations that have expressed interest in
working on preservation projects in Santa Clara County in
particular, including organizations such as BRIDGE Housing
Corporation and Eden Housing. The organizations listed
above are but a few of those listed in the HCD database
that the City of Cupertino could consider as potential
partners in the event that it becomes necessary to assemble
a team to preserve an affordable housing project.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT NOUSING ELEMENT g.4 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
2.7. Special Housing Needs
This section of the needs assessment profiles populations
with special housing needs, including seniors, large
households, single parent households, persons with
disabilities (including persons with developmental
disabilities), farm workers, persons living in poverty, and
homeless persons.
Table 2.20 summarizes the special needs groups in
Cupertino
r s .., .
ii
Senior-Headed 3,983 785 (19.7%) 3,198 (80.3%) 19.7%
Households
Households with a 5,069 n/a n/a 25.1%
Senior Member
Seniors Living Alone 1,612 516 (32.0%) 1,096 (68.0%) 8.0%
Large Households 1,883 619 (32.9%) 1,264 (67.1%) 9.3%
Single-Parent 883 n/a n/a 4.4%
Households
Female Single-Parent 667 n/a n/a 6.9%
Households
Persons with Disabilities 3,445 n/a n/a 5.9%
a)
Agricultural Workers (b) 36 n/a n/a 1%
Persons living in Poverty 2,330 n/a n/a 4.0%
b)
Homeless (c)112 n/a n/a 1%
Notes:
a)2010 Census data not available for persons with disabilities. Estimate is from the 2008-2012 ACS. Estimate is for persons 5 years
of age and older.
b)2010 Census data not available. Estimate is from the 2007-2011 ACS.
c)2010 Census data not available. Estimate is from 2013 Santa Clara County Homeless Point-In-Time Census and Survey
Comprehensive Report. Of the 112 homeless persons counted in Cupertino in 2013, 92 persons were unsheltered and 20 were
sheltered.
Sources:Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013; U.S. Census,American
Community Survey(ACS), 2008-2012;2013 Santa Clara County Homeless Point-In-Time Census and Survey Comprehensive Report.
4 g HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Seniors
Many senior residents face a unique set of housing needs,
largely due to physical limitations, fixed incomes, and
health care costs. Affordable housing cost, unit sizes and
accessibility to transit, family, health care, and other services
are important housing concerns for the seniors.
As Table 2.21 shows, in 2010, 19.7 percent of Cupertino
householders were 65 years old or older, comparable
to the proportion of senior households in Santa Clara
County (18.5 percent). A large majority of these senior
households owned their homes (80.3 percent). In Cupertino,
homeownership is much more common among seniors than
for any other age group. Just 58.2 percent of householders
under 64 years old owned their homes.
Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS)
data shown in Table 2.16 indicates that among Cupertino's
senior households, renters were more likely to be lower
income than homeowners. Nearly 62 percent of senior
renter-households earned less than 80 percent of the
median family income compared to only 42 percent of
senior homeowners.
Seniors across the country are often required to dedicate
a larger portion of their income to housing costs. Among
all of the renter-households in Cupertino, the proportion
of seniors overpaying for housing in 2010 was more than
double the proportion for the general population: 63
percent versus 30 percent, respectively (see Table 2.16 on
page A-40). For homeowners, however, the proportion of
senior owner-households overpaying for housing was much
more on par with the general population (29 percent versus
34 percent, respectively). During the community outreach
process for developing the Housing Element, the need for
senior housing options in Cupertino was highlighted by
many residents.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING EIEMENT B-4 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
i 1 1
t f4i,
il •
Under 64 Years Old
Owner 9,429 58.2% 265,727 54.0%
Renter 6,769 41.8% 226,517 46.0%
Total 16,198 100.0% 492,244 100.0%
65 Plus Years Old
Owner 3,198 80.3% 82,571 73.8%
Renter 785 19.7% 29,389 26.2%
Total 3,983 100.0% 111,960 100.0%
Total Households 20,181 604,204
Percent Householders q o 0 18.5%
65 Plus Years
Source:Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013.
Resources Available
Cupertino offers a number of resources for seniors. As
shown in Table 2.22, there are five residential care facilities
for the elderly and three skilled nursing facilities in the city.
Residential care facilities for the elderly (RCFEs), also known
as "assisted living" or "board and care" facilities, provide
assistance with some activities of daily living while still
allowing residents to be more independent than in most
nursing homes. Skilled nursing facilities—also known as
nursing homes—offer a higher level of care, with registered
nurses on staff 24 hours a day.
In addition to assisted living facilities, there are two
subsidized independent senior housing developments in
the city. As shown in Table 2.22, there are a total of 100
units of affordable senior housing in Cupertino. Furthermore
in 2011, the City utilized CDBG funds to rehabilitate a
home that provides accommodation to five low-income
B-5 0 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Hous ng Element Technical Report
seniors. Demand for these subsidized units is high. Staff
at Sunny View estimate that over 700 people are on the
waiting list, and the turnover rate for available units is about
10 to 15 per year.
The Cupertino Senior Center also serves as an excellent
resource for seniors. The many different services at the
center help seniors to obtain resources in the community
that will assist them to continue to remain independent
and safe in their own homes. Available programs include
various social and recreation activities, special events, travel
programs, transportation discounts, drop-in consultation,
case management, medical, and social services.
Additionally, the Senior Adult Day Care (Cupertino Center)
provides frail, dependent, low-income Cupertino seniors
with specialized programs of recreation, mental stimulation,
exercise, companionship and nutritious meals during the
day. This facility is operated by Live Oak Adult Day Care a
local non-profit organization.
In addition, the City supports a number of programs with
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), General
Fund Human Service Grants (HSG) and Below Market-Rate
BMR) Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) funds that provide
services specifically for seniors in the community. The Long-
Term Care Ombudsman Program, operated by Catholic
Charities, provides advocacy for Cupertino seniors in long-
term care facilities to ensure they have a voice in their own
care and treatment. The program receives, investigates
and resolves any complaints associated with the care of
long-term care facility residents. A legal assistance program
for seniors is provided by Senior Adults Legal Assistance
SALA) which provides free legal services to low- and very
low-income seniors at the Cupertino Senior Center. Legal
services provided are in the area of consumer complaints,
housing, elder abuse, and simple wills. The Live Oak
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUS NG ELEMENT g 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Adult Day Care receives partial financial assistance to help
operate the Senior Adult Day Care (Cupertino Center).
Residential Care Facilities for the Location Capacity
Elderly
The Forum at Rancho San Antonio 23500 Cristo Rey Drive 741
Paradise Manor 4 19161 Muriel Lane b
Pleasant Manor of Cupertino 10718 Nathanson Avenue 6
Purglen of Cupertino 10366 Miller Avenue 12
Sunny View Manor (a) 22445 Cupertino Road 190
Total 955
Skilled Nursing Facilities
Health Care Center at Forum at 23600 Via Esplendor 4$
Rancho San Antonio
Cupertino Healthcare & Wellness 22590 Voss Avenue 170
Center
Sunny View Manor 22445 Cupertino Road 48
Total 266
Subsidized Independent Senior
Rental Housing
Sunny View West 22449 Cupertino Road 99
Senior Housing Solutions 19935 Price Avenue
Total 100
Adult Day Care
Live Oak Adult Day Services 20920 McClellan Road 30
Cupertino Senior Center 21251 Stevens Creek N/A
Notes:
a)Sunny View Manor has 115 units for independent and assisted(RCFE)living.All 1 15 units are licensed as RCFE units, but residentsmaychoosebetweenindependentandassistedlivingoptions. The distribution of independent and assisted living units varies overtime. Sources:California Dep artment of Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division Facility Search Form, 2014;California
Department of Public Healtf, Health Facilities Search, 2014.
B_5 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Large Households
Large households are defined as those with five or
more members. Large households are identified as a
special needs group because of limited opportunities for
adequately sized and affordable housing. Cupertino has
a smaller proportion of large households than Santa Clara
County as a whole. As shown in Table 2.23, 9.3 percent of
all households in Cupertino were comprised of five or more
persons in 2010. In Santa Clara County, about 14.8 percent
of households were considered large. Large households
were more likely to be homeowners (1,264 households, 67
percent) than renters (619 households, 33 percent).
While Cupertino has a smaller proportion of large
households than Santa Clara County, its housing stock is
comprised of a (arger proportion of homes with three or
more bedrooms. As shown in Table 2.24, about 64 percent
of the housing units in Cupertino had three or more
bedrooms while only 59 percent of Santa Clara County
homes had three or more bedrooms.
i
Cupertino
1-4 Persons 11,363 90.0%6,935 91.8% 18,298 90.7%
5+ Persons 1,264 10.0% 619 8.2% 1,883 9.3%
Total 12,627 100.0% 7,554 100.0% 20,181 100.0%
Santa Clara County
1- 4 Persons 297,385 85.4% 217,578 85.0% 514,963 85.2%
5+ Persons 50,913 14.6% 38,328 15.0% 89,241 14.8%
Total 348,298 100.0% 255,906 100.0% 604,204 100.0%
Source:Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 8-5 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
r i lR 1
n
r
p , ,
i; ' N $ c.
i
i?.'.l lt6^b'9.+1 .'1.b,•
y
Cupertino
No Bedroom 0 0.0% 208 2.9% 208 1.0%
1 Bedroom 468 3.6% 1,554 21.5% 2,022 10.0%
2 Bedrooms 1,530 11.8% 3,491 48.4% 5,021 24.9%
3 Bedrooms 4,782 36.9% 1,609 22.3% 6,391 31.7%
4 Bedrooms 4,785 36.9% 314 4.4% 5,099 25.3%
5 or More Bedrooms 1,396 10.8% 39 0.5% 1,435 7.1%
Tota! 12,961 100.0% 7,215 100.0% 20,176 100.0%
Santa Clara County
No Bedroom 1,091 0.3% 16,371 6.6% 17,462 2.9%
1 Bedroom 7,477 2.1% 74,195 29.9% 81,672 13.6%
2 Bedrooms 54,461 15.5% 94,453 38.1% 148,914 24.8%
3 Bedrooms 147,933 42.0% 45,456 18.3% 193,389 32.3%
4 Bedrooms 109,892 31.2% 13,875 5.6% 123,767 20.6%
5 or More Bedrooms 31,043 8.8% 3,405 1.4% 34,448 5.7%
Total 351,897 100.0% 247,755 100.0% 599,652 100.0%
Source:Association of Bay Area Governments(ABAG), Housing Element Data Profiles, December 2013.
Resources Available
Large households in Cupertino can benefit from the general
housing programs and services offered by the City, such
as the BMR Program and housing rehabilitation programs.
Other programs include Mortgage Credit Certificates and
Housing Choice Vouchers administered by the County, and
homebuyer assistance offered by the Housing Trust Silicon
Valley.
g_q HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING EI.EMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Single-Parent Households
Single-parent households often require special
consideration and assistance because of their greater
need for affordable housing and accessible day-care,
health care, and other supportive services. Female-headed
single-parent households with children, in particular, tend
to have a higher need for affordable housing than other
family households in general. In addition, these households
are more likely to need childcare since the mother is often
the sole source of income and the sole caregiver for the
children in the household. In 2010, there were 667 female-
headed single-parent households with children under 18
years of age in Cupertino, representing 3.3 percent of all
households in the City (Table 2.25). A significant proportion
of these households were living in poverty in 2011 (21
percent). The U.S. Census Bureau sets poverty level
thresholds each year and they are often used to establish
eligibility for federal services.
The number of female-headed single-parent households
declined slightly from 2000, but these households continue
to make up the same proportion of all households in the
City. Compared to Santa Clara County, the City's proportion
of female-headed single-parent households was lower (five
percent versus three percent, respectively).
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-5 S
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
1 1
p
T,_,;-y„, u...M- ;- .,. -._.;:,_,N_-<,.,.,x
ii ,..
1-Person Household 3,544 17.6%
Male Householder 1,472 7.3%
Fem le Househo der 2,072 10.3%
2 or More Person Household 16,637 82.4°/a
Family Households: 15,776 78•2%
Married-Couple Family 13,802 68.4%
With Own Children Under 18 Years 8,392 41.6%
Other Family; 1,974 9.8%
Male Householder, no Wife Present 581 2.9%
With Own Children Under 18 Years 216 1.1%
Female Householder, no Wife Present 1,393 6.9%
With Own Children Under 18 Years 667 3.3%
Nonfamily Households: 4,405 21.8%
Male Householder 1,472 7.3%
Female Householder 2,072 10.3°/a
Total Households 20,181 100.0%
Source: U.S. Census, 2010.
Resources Available
Single-parent households in Cupertino can benefit from
City programs and services that provide assistance to lower
income households in general, such as the BMR, CDBG and
HSG Programs. Single-parent households can also benefit
from supportive and childcare services available to County
residents through various organizations, including Catholic
Charities of Santa Clara County, Choices for Children, Grail
Family Services, InnVision Shelter Network, Second Harvest
Food Bank, and West Valley Community Services, among
others. 3
3 David Rosen. "Inclusionary Housing and Its Impact on Housing and Land
Markets." NHC Affordable Housing Policy Review 1(3).2004.
8-5 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
1
kx:ar..R.t,.a a.,,, r,:v
Married-Couple Family 237 57.5%
With Own Children Under 18 Years 115 27.9%
Other Family
Male Householder 26 6.3%
With Own Children Under 18 Years 7 1.7%
Female Householder 149 36.2%
With Own Children Under 18 Years 87 21.1%
Total Families Below Poverty Line 412 100.0%
Source: U.S. Census,American Community Survey(ACS), 2007,2011
Persons with Disabilities
A disability is a physical or mental impairment that limits
one or more major life activities. Persons with a disability
generally have lower incomes and often face barriers to
finding employment or adequate housing due to physical
or structural obstacles. This segment of the population
often needs affordable housing that is located near public
transportation, services, and shopping. Persons with
disabilities may require units equipped with wheelchair
accessibility or other special features that accommodate
physical or sensory limitations. Depending on the severity
of the disability, people may live independently with some
assistance in their own homes, or may require assisted living
and supportive services in special care facilities.
According to the 2008-2012 ACS, about six percent of
Cupertino residents and eight percent of Santa Clara
County residents had one or more disabilities (Table 2.27).
Hearing, ambulatory, and independent living difficulties
were the most common disabilities among seniors, while
cognitive difficulties were more common among persons
HCD REVIEWEO DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g -5 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
aged 18 to 64 with disabilities. Overall, ambulatory
difficulties were the most prevalent (45.2 percent). Table
2.28 shows that among persons with disabilities aged 18 to
64, the majority (55.8 percent) in both the City and County
were not in the labor force. About one-third of both City
and County residents (aged 18 to 64) with disabilities were
employed.
Persons with Developmental Disabilities
A recent change in State law requires that the Housing
Element discuss the housing needs of persons with
developmental disabilities. As defined by the Section 4512
of the Welfare and Institutions Code, "developmental
disability" means "a disability that originates before an
individual attains age 18 years, continues, or can be
expected to continue, indefinitely, and constitutes a
substantial disability for that individual. As defined by the
Director of Developmental Services, in consultation with the
Superintendent of Public Instruction, this term shall include
mental retardation, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and autism.
This term shall also include disabling conditions found
to be closely related to mental retardation or to require
treatment similar to that required for individuals with mental
retardation, but shall not include other handicapping
conditions that are solely physical in nature. This definition
also reflects the individual's need for a combination and
sequence of special, interdisciplinary, or generic services,
individualized supports, or other forms of assistance that
are of lifelong or extended duration and are individually
planned and coordinated.
g_5 g HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Eleme t Technical fteport
t D
g _.,'
L• .
Cupertino
With a hearing difficulty 17.8% 21.6% 55.3% 40.8%
With a vision difficulty 5.3%16.4% 10.9% 12.7%
With a cognitive difficulty 36.2% 40.3% 21.9% 29.5%
With an ambulatory difficulty 30.3% 32.1% 55.0% 45.2%
With a self-care difficulty 57.9% 19.6% 20.0% 21.5°/a
With an independent living 32.0% 46.0% 38.6%difficulty
Total Persons with 152 1,313 1,980 3,445Disabilities (a)
of Total Population 6%
Santa Clara C,ou.raty.
With a hearing difficulty 11.8% 20.1% 41.4% 29.8%
With a vision difficulty 14.6% 16.4% 17.4% 16.7%
With a cognitive difficulty 69.4% 41.7% 28.0% 36.9%
With an ambulatory difficulty 17.5% 42.3% 61.9% 50.1%
With a self-care difficulty 28.5% 17.2% 26.9% 22.6%
With an independent living 36.8% 51.4% 41.5%difficulty
Total Persons with 8,691 62,221 65,554 136,466Disabilities (a)
of Total Population 8%
Note:
a)Total does not include population under 5 years of age. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census,American Community Survey
ACS), 2008-2012.
The Census does not record developmental disabilities.
However, according to the U.S. Administration on
Developmental Disabilities, an accepted estimate of the
percentage of the population that can be defined as
developmentally disabled is 1.5 percent. This equates to
approximately 875 persons with developmental disabilities
residing in the City of Cupertino, based on the 2010 Census
population.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B -5 9
COMMUNITY ViSION 2040
City of Cupertino
1
r, _ .e_ ;: , .. „ . .
Total Popul ion
Age 18-b4 a 1,313 100.0% 62,221 100.0%
Employed 480 36.6% 22,566 36.3%
Unemployed 101 7.7% 4,932 7.9%
Not in Labor Force 32 55.8% 34,723 55.8%
Note:
a)Total does not include population under 18 years of age or over 65 years. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census,American Community
Survey(ACS), 2008-2012
According to the State's Department of Developmental
Services, as of September 2013, approximately 303
Cupertino residents with developmental disabilities were
being assisted at the San Andreas Regional Center. Most
of these individuals were residing in a private home with
their parent or guardian, and 196 of these persons with
developmental disabilities were under the age of 18.
Many developmentally disabled persons can live and work
independently within a conventional housing environment.
More severely disabled individuals require a group living
environment where supervision is provided. The most
severely affected individuals may require an institutional
environment where medical attention and physical therapy
are provided. Because developmental disabilities exist
before adulthood, the first issue in supportive housing for
the developmentally disabled is the transition from the
person's living situation as a child to an appropriate level of
independence as an adult.
Resources Available
Table 2.29 summarizes the licensed community care
facilities in Cupertino that serve special needs groups.
B-60 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Hous ng Element Technical Report
Adult residential facilities offer 24-hour non-medical care for
adults, ages 18 to 59 years old, who are unable to provide
for their daily needs due to physical or mental disabilities.
Group homes, small residential facilities that serve children
or adults with chronic disabilities, also provide 24-hour care
by trained professionals. In addition, a 27-unit multi-family
residential property (Le Beaulieu) offers affordable housing
to very low-income persons with disabilities.
f :
Paradise Manor 2 19133 Muriel Lane b
Paradise Manor 3 19147 Muriel Lane b
Total 12
Pace-Morehouse 7576 Kirwin Lane 6
Pacific Autism Center for
19681 Drake Drive 6EducationMiracleHouse
Total 2
Source:California Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division Facility Search Form,2014
Farmworkers
Farmworkers are traditionally defined as persons whose
primary incomes are earned through agricultural labor.
They have special housing needs because of their relatively
low income and also because of the often transient and
seasonal nature of their jobs. The 2011 ACS reported that
36 Cupertino residents were employed in the agriculture,
farming, fishing and forestry occupations, making up less
than 0.1 percent of the City's population.
Resources Available
To the extent that farmworkers may want to live in
Cupertino, their need for affordable housing would
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 6 -6 1
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
be similar to that of other lower income persons, and
their housing needs can be addressed through general
affordable housing programs for lower-income households,
such as BMR, CDBG and HSG programs.
Residents Living Below the Poverty Level
Families with incomes below the poverty level, specifically
those with extremely low and very low incomes, are at
the greatest risk of becoming homeless and often require
assistance in meeting their rent and mortgage obligations
in order to prevent homelessness. The 2007-2011 ACS
found that four percent of all Cupertino residents were
living below the poverty level. Specifically, about three
percent of family households and two percent of families
with children were living below the poverty level. These
households may require specific housing solutions such
as deeper income targeting for subsidies, housing with
supportive services, single-room occupancy units, or rent
subsidies and vouchers.
Resources Availabie
Persons living with incomes below the poverty level can
benefit from City programs and services that provide
assistance to lower-income households in general, such as
BMR, CDBG and HSG programs. Households with incomes
below the poverty level can also benefit from supportive
services available to County residents through various
organizations, including Catholic Charities of Santa Clara
County, Choices for Children, InnVision Shelter Network,
Second Harvest Food Bank, and West Valley Community
Services, among others.
Homeless
Demand for emergency and transitional shelter in Cupertino
is difficult to determine given the episodic nature of
homelessness. Generally, episodes of homelessness
g 6 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
among families or individuals can occur as a single event
or periodically. The 2013 Santa Clara County Homeless
Census & Survey reported a point-in-time count of 7,631
homeless people on the streets and in emergency shelters,
transitional housing, and domestic violence shelters. This
estimate includes 112 homeless individuals in the City
of Cupertino. The count, however, should be considered
conservative because many unsheltered homeless
individuals may not be visible at street locations, even with
the most thorough methodology.
There is no data presently available documenting the
increased level of demand for shelter in Santa Clara County
or Cupertino during particular times of the year. Due to the
relatively mild climate, the only time of year when increased
demand appears to be a factor is during the winter months
November to March). The annual homeless count always
takes place in the last week of January, a period when
demand for shelter typically is at its highest. Since the
year-round need described above is based on the annual
count, the need for emergency shelter either year-round or
seasonally is not likely to be greater than that found during
the annual homeless count.
Resources Available
Table 2.31 lists facilities within Santa Clara County that
serve the needs of homeless. Emergency shelters provide
temporary shelter for individuals and families while
transitional shelters serve families making a transition
from homelessness to permanent housing. In Cupertino,
West Valley Community Services (WVCS) offers supportive
services and the Transitional Housing Program (THP)
through its Haven to Home Program. The Haven to Home
Program helps homeless individuals and families work
towards stability by providing access to resources such as
food, transportation, toiletries and other such items. The
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-6 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupertino
program has the capacity to provide housing for 12 single
men and six single mothers with one child under the age
of six. Residents of THP sign a six-month lease, which
may be renewed depending on the resident's case plan
and progress. For supportive services, a case manager is
available to provide intensive case management for up to
21 homeless households at a time. The THP typically has
a waiting list of 10 to 30 households, while the waiting list
for supportive services generally has five to 20 households.
Given the increase in requests for emergency shelter over
the past few years, WVCS staff believes that there is a need
for additional emergency shelter services in Cupertino. This
need is particularly high for families with children.
Additionally, Faith in Action Silicon Valley Rotating Shelter
operates a rotating shelter program which accommodates
up to 15 homeless men. The shelter rotates locations, which
include various Cupertino congregation and community
partner locations. Additional services offered by the
program include case management, meals, shower facilities,
bus passes, job development and counseling, and other
supportive services.
f s e
i,if:it l:
Cupertino
Unsheltered (b) 92 82•1%
Sheltered (c) 20 17•9%
Total 112 100.0%
Santa Clara County
Unsheltered (b) 5,674 74.4%
Persons in Family Households 1,011 13.2%
Sheltered (c)1,957 25.6%
Persons in Family Households 56 7%
Total 7,631 100.0%
Notes:
a)7his Homeless Census and Survey was conducted over a two day period from January 29 to January 30,2013
This survey,per HUD new requirements, does not include people in rehabilitation facilities, hospitals orjails
due to more narrow HUD definition of point-in-time homelessness. (b)Individuals found living on the streets, in parks,
encampments, vehicles, or other places not meant for humanhabitation. (c)Individuals who are living in emergency shelters or
transitional housing programs. Source:2013 Santa ClaraCounty Homeless Point-In-Time Census&Survey, Comprehensive Report.
B-b 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Techn cal Report
2.8. Needs Assessment Summary
Cupertino grew faster than Santa Clara County and the
Bay Area between 2000 and 2010. The local population
increased by 15 percent from 50,600 people to 58,300.
However, some of this growth was due to the annexation
of 168 acres of unincorporated land in Santa Clara
County between 2000 and 2008.
ABAG projects Cupertino will grow to 71,200 residents
by 2040. Cupertino and Santa Clara County are
anticipated to experience the same rate of population
increase (nearly 21 percent) between 2010 and 2040;
the Bay Area's population is expected to increase by 28
percent during the same time.
Cupertino has an aging population. The median age in
Cupertino rose from 37.9 years old in 2000 to 39.9 years
old in 2010. The percent of elderly residents, aged 65
years old and older, increased from 11 percent to 13
percent.
The City has a high percentage of family households;
in 2010, family households comprised 77 percent of all
households in Cupertino, compared with 71 percent of
Santa Clara County households and 65 percent of Bay
Area households.
Large households comprised 9.3 percent of the City's
total households, the majority of which were owner-
households. Overall, the proportion of large households
in the City was lower than countywide average.
Approximately 3.3 percent of all households in the City
were single-parent households, with 21 percent living
below the poverty level. However, the proportion of
single-parent households in the City has declined since
2000.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g.6 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
About six percent of the City's population aged five
and above had one or more disabilities, lower than
the countywide average of eight percent. According
to the State Department of Developmental Services,
303 residents were being assisted at the San Andreas
Regional Center.
Cupertino, along with Santa Clara County, is becoming
an increasingly jobs-rich city. ABAG projects the number
of jobs in Cupertino will increase by 25 percent between
2010 and 2040, resulting in a jobs-to-household ratio of
1.38 by 2040, up from the ratio of 1.29 in 2010.
The local housing stock is dominated by single-family
detached homes; 57 percent of homes were single-family
detached dwellings in 2013. Although the number of
multi-family housing units experienced the most rapid
growth between 2000 and 2013, Cupertino still has a
smaller proportion of multi-family housing units than
Santa Clara County (28 percent in the city versus 32
percent in the County overall). One affordable housing
project— Beardon Drive (eight units) — is considered at
risk of converting to market-rate housing during the next
ten years.
Housing costs continue to rise in Cupertino. Median
home sales prices rose by approximately 29 percent
between 2011 and 2013, after plateauing between 2008
and 2010 during the depth of the housing market crisis.
Homeownership in Cupertino is generally out of reach for
most except the highest-earning households.
Affordable rental housing is equally difficult to obtain.
The current median market rent rate of $3,500 for a
three-bedroom unit exceeds the maximum affordable
monthly rent for lower- and moderate-income
households.
B-6 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Techn cal Report
G
T-
E
w.,
y,
o ., _ ,., ., ,,. ,.,.. , .,i'i'+3,`:', -
Asian Americans For Emergency (Victims of Asian Women's Home 2400
Community Involvement Domestic Violence -Moor ark Avenue Suite 300 12 ersonsofSantaClaraCounty, P P
Inc. Women and Children) San Jose, 95128
Boccardo Reception Center (BRC)
200 Persons (Year
EHC LifeBuilders Emergency 2011 Little Orchard
Round) 250 Persons
San Jose, 95125
December 2 to March
31)
Sunnyvale National Guard
EHC LifeBuilders Emergency Armory 620 E. Maude 125 Persons
Sunnyvale, 94086
Boccardo Reception Center (BRC)
40 Persons (DecemberEHCLifeBuildersEmergency (Veterans) 2011 Little Orchard
2 to March 31)
San Jose, 95125
Sobrato House Youth Center 496
EHC LifeBuilders Emergency (Youth) S. Third Street 10 beds
San Jose, CA 95112
San Jose Family Shelter 692FamilySupportiveEmergency (Families) North King Road 35 FamiliesHousing
San Jose, CA, 95133-1667
Faith In Action Silicon Valley
Faith In Action Silicon
Emergency Rotating Shelter 1669-2 15 PersonsValleyRotatingShelterHollenbeckAve. #220
Sunnyvale, CA 94087
Julian Street Inn
InnVision Emergency 546 West Julian Street 70 Beds
San Jose, CA, 95110
Emergency (Women
260 Commercial Street
InnVision San Jose, CA, 95112 55 Persons
and Children)
Emergency (Victims of The Shelter Next DoorSanta
Next Door Solutions to Domestic Violence -Clara Count a 20 PersonsDomesticViolencey
Women and Children)
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g.6 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
A
q . Y'.'C-'!'-o +.J'...i'._n,.e
eu ,
1
s
Transitional (Families BOccardo Family Living Center
EHC LifeBuilders ith Children) 13545 Monterey Road 26 Units
San Martin, CA 95046
Transitional
Boccardo Regional Reception
EHC LifeBuilders Veterans)
Center 2011 Little Orchard St. 20 Beds
San Jose, CA 95125
Sobrato House Youth Center
EHC LifeBuilders Transitional (Youth) 496 S. Third Street 9 Units
San Jose, CA 95112
Family Supportive Transitional (Families)
Scattered Sites in Santa Clara Not available
Housing County
Montgomery Street Inn
InnVision Transitional 358 N. Montgomery Street 85 Persons
San Jose, CA 95110
Transitional (Women
Villa 184
InnVision
and Children)
South 11th Street 55 Persons
San Jose, CA 95112
Transitional (Victims
Next Door Solutions to of Domestic Violence The HomeSafes in San Jose 48 Units
Domestic Violence Women and and Santa Clara (a)
Children)
Transitional (Men and
10311-10321 Greenwood Ct. 12 Single Men and 6WestValleyCommunityCupertino, CA 95014
Services Single Mothers) Single Mothers
Maitri
Transitional (Women
N/A (address is confidential)9 Beds
and Children)
Note:
a)Location is confidential. Source:211 Santa Clara County, 2014.
g_6 g HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
In 2010, 30 percent of renters and 37 percent of
homeowners were overpaying for housing in Cupertino.
In 2010, 63 percent of elderly renter-households were
overpaying for housing, the highest rate among any
household type regardless of tenure.
The 2013 Santa Clara County Homeless Survey reported
a point-in-time count of 7,631 homeless people on the
streets and in emergency shelters, transitional housing,
and domestic violence shelters, including 112 individuals
in the City of Cupertino.
3. REGIONAL HOUSINC NEEDS
DETERMINATIONS 2014-2022
This section discusses the projected housing needs for the
current planning period, which runs from January 1, 2014
through October 31, 2022.
3.1. Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65584, the
state, regional councils of government (in this case, ABAG),
and local governments must collectively determine each
locality's share of regional housing need. In conjunction
with the state-mandated housing element update cycle that
requires Bay Area jurisdictions to update their elements
by January 31, 2015, ABAG has allocated housing unit
production needs for each jurisdiction within the Bay Area.
These allocations set housing production goals for the
planning period that runs from January 1, 2014 through
October 31, 2022.
The following summarizes ABAG's housing need allocation
for Cupertino, along with housing production data for the
2014-2022 time period. The City of Cupertino may count
housing units constructed, approved, or proposed since
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-6 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
January 1, 2014 toward satisfying its RHNA goals for this
planning period. Table 3.1 presents a summary of ABAG's
housing needs allocation for Cupertino for 2014 to 2022.
j __._.:. .
P y
Extremely LowNery Low (0-50% of AM I) 356 33.5%
Low (51-80% of AM I)207 19.5%
Moderate (81-120% of AM I) 231 21.7%
Above Moderate (over 120%AMI) 270 25.4%
Total Units 1,064 100.0%
Source:ABAG Regional Housing Needs Assessment, 2014.
3.2 Housing Needs for Extremely Low-Income
Households
State law requires housing elements to quantify and analyze
the existing and projected housing needs of extremely
low-income households. HUD defines an extremely low-
income household as one earning less than 30 percent of
AMI. These households encounter a unique set of housing
situations and needs, and may often include special needs
populations or represent families and individuals receiving
public assistance, such as social security insurance (SSI) or
disability insurance.
As discussed in the Needs Assessment section,
approximately eight percent of all Cupertino households
earned less than 30 percent of AMI in 2010. Extremely low-
income households represented 12 percent of all renter-
households and five percent of all owner-households.
To estimate the projected housing need for extremely low
income households, state law allows either assuming 50
g_p HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
percent of the very low-income households as extremely low
income, or to apportion the very low-income households
based on Census-documented distribution. Using the
allowable even split, 50 percent of Cupertino's 356 very low-
income RHNA units are assumed to serve extremely low-
income households. Based on this methodology, the city
has a projected need of 178 units for extremely low-income
households.
Extremely low-income households often rely on supportive
or subsidized housing as a means of transitioning into
stable, more productive lives. Supportive housing combines
housing with supportive services such as job training,
life skills training, substance abuse programs, and case
management services. Subsidized housing can include
programs such as the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher
Program or tenant-based rental assistance (TBRA) which
ensures that the tenant does not pay more than 30 percent
of their gross income on housing by paying a portion of the
tenants rent. Efficiency studios and BMR rental units can also
provide affordable housing opportunities for extremely low-
income households.
4, H lJ51f°C I Tf AII iT
Section 65583(a)(4) of the California Government Code
states that the housing element must analyze "potential
and actual governmental constraints upon the maintenance,
improvement, or development of housing for all income
levels, including land use controls, building codes and their
enforcement, site improvements, fees and other exactions
required of developers, and local processing and permit
procedures."
In addition to government constraints, this section
assesses other factors that may constrain the production of
affordable housing in Cupertino. These include infrastructure
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g_7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupertino
availability, environmental features, economic and financing
constraints, market conditions and community acceptance
of different housing types and densities. Recent court
rulings have removed some of the mechanisms local
government traditionally has used to require developers to
provide affordable housing, thus exacerbating the difficulty
of ineeting the number of units determined necessary by
the regional housing needs assessment.
4.1 . Government Constraints
Government regulations can affect housing costs by
limiting the supply of buildable land, setting standards and
allowable densities for development, and exacting fees for
the use of land or the construction of homes. The increased
costs associated with such requirements are often passed
on to consumers in the form of higher home prices and
rents. Potential regulatory constraints include local land
use policies (as defined in a community's general plan),
zoning regulations and their accompanying development
standards, subdivision regulations, growth control
ordinances or urban limit lines, and development impact
and building permit fees. Lengthy approval and processing
times also may be regulatory constraints.
General Plan
The General Plan provides the policy and program direction
necessary to guide land use decisions in the first two
decades of the 21 st century. The existing General Plan
is current and legally adequate and is not considered an
impediment to housing production.
As required by state law, the General Plan includes a land
use map indicating the allowable uses and densities at
various locations in the city. The Land Use/Community
Design section identifies five categories of residential uses
g_7 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Hous ng Element Technical Report
based on dwelling unit density, expressed as the number of
dwelling units permitted per gross acre.
The "Very Low Density" classification, intended to
protect environmentally sensitive areas from extensive
development and to protect human life from hazards
associated with floods, fires, and unstable terrain,
applies one of four slope-density formulas to determine
allowable residential density.
The "Low Density" and "Low/Medium Density"
categories promote traditional single-family
development, allowing densities of one to five units
per gross acre, and five to 10 units per gross acre,
respectively.
The "Medium/High Density" and the "High Density"
categories provide for a wide range of multi-family
housing opportunities at densities of 10 to 20 units per
gross acre and 20 to 35 units per gross acre, respectively.
In addition to the five residential categories, the General
Plan allows for residential uses in the "Industrial/
Residential," "Office/Commercial/Residential,"
Commercial/Residential" and "Neighborhood Commercial/
Residential" land use categories.
INone of the City's General Plan policies have been
identified as housing constraints. The General Plan does
not define whether residential units are to be rented or
owned or whether they are to be attached or detached. The
General Plan's land use policies incorporate housing goals,
including the following:
Policy LU-1 .1 : Land Use and Transportation
Focus higher land use intensities and densities within a half-
mile of public transit service, and along major corridors.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-7 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Policy LU-1.4: Land Use in all Citywide Mixed-Use
Districts
Encourage land uses that support the activity and character
of mixed-use districts and economic goals.
Policy LU-5.2: Mixed-Use Villages
Where housing is allowed along major corridors or
neighborhood commercial areas, development should
promote mixed-use villages with active ground-floor uses
and public space. The development should help create an
inviting pedestrian environment and activity center that can
serve adjoining neighborhoods and businesses.
Policy LU-8.3: Incentives for Reinvestment
Provide incentives for reinvestment in existing, older
commercial areas, including considering mixed use and
reduced/shared parking.
Policy LU-13.3: Parcel Assembly
Heart of the City Special Area: Encourage the assembly
of parcels to foster new development projects that can
provide high-quality development with adequate buffers for
neighborhoods.
Policy LU-19.1 : Vallco Shopping District Specific
Plan
Create a Vallco Shopping District Specific Plan prior to any
development on the site that lays out the land uses, design
standards and guidelines, and infrastructure improvements
required.
The General Plan contains very few policies addressing the
siting of housing, other than those pertaining to hillside and
other sensitive areas. Land use policies limit development
in hillside areas to protect hillside resources but allows
g_7 q HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
for low-intensity residential development in the foothills.
The General Plan also encourages the clustering of new
development away from sensitive areas such as riparian
corridors, wildlife habitat and corridors, public open space
preserves and ridgelines. Thus, even in hillside and sensitive
areas, the General Plan creates opportunities for housing
production.
Zoning Ordinance
The Cupertino Zoning Ordinance establishes development
standards and densities for new housing in the City.
These regulations include minimum lot sizes, maximum
number of dwelling units per acre, lot width, setbacks, lot
coverage, maximum building height, and minimum parking
requirements. These standards are summarized in Table
4.1. As required by state law, the Zoning Map is consistent
with the General Plan. The residential zoning districts and
their respective permitted densities and development
standards are summarized below. Residential development
is permitted by right in residential zones.
R-1 Single Family Residential
The R-1 District is intended to create, preserve, and enhance
areas suitable for detached single-family dwellings. The R-1
District includes sub-areas with varying minimum lot size
requirements. Residential structures in the R-1 District are
limited in size by a maximum lot coverage of 45 percent
and a maximum floor area ratio of 45 percent. Setbacks
are 20 feet in the front and rear yards and a combined 15
feet of side yards, with no one side yard setback less than
5 feet. The maximum building height of 28 feet allows for
a wide range of single family housing types on flat terrain.
Structures in R-1 Districts with an "i" designation at the end
are limited to one story (18 feet).
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g -7 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
i
4
f'
s.
n-a.
s.-
A 18-28 50-60 30 20 25 215,000 N/A
A-1 20-28 200 30 20 20-25 43,000-215,000 40%
R-1 28 60 20-25 10-15 20 5,000-20,000 45%
R-2 15-30 60-70 20 6-12
20 ft./20% lot depth,
g 500-15,000 40%
whichever is greater
R-3 30 70 20 6-18
20 ft./20% lot depth,
q,300 40%
whichever is greater.
RHS 30 70 20-25 10-15 25 20,000-400,000 45%
R-1 C 30 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Note:(a)Maximum number of units cannot exceed that allowed by the General Plan,pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance. Source:Cupertino
Municipal Code,2014.
Two-story structures in the R-1 District require a Two-
Story Residential Permit. The Director of Community
Development may approve, conditionally approve, or deny
applications for a two-story residential permit. Projects
must be "harmonious in scale and design with the general
neighborhood."
R-2 Residential Duplex
The R-2 District is intended to allow a second dwelling unit
under the same ownership as the initial dwelling unit on a
site. The residential duplex district is intended to increase
the variety of housing opportunities within the community
while maintaining the existing neighborhood character.
Minimum lot area is 8,500 square feet; building heights in
this district cannot exceed 30 feet. The R-2 District limits
lot coverage by all buildings to 40 percent of net lot area.
Setbacks are 20 feet in the front yard and the greater of
20 feet and 20 percent of lot depth in the rear yard; the
minimum side yard setback is 20 percent of the lot width.
g_b HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Repo t
Structures in R-2 Districts with an "i" designation at the end
are limited to one story (18 feet).
The development standards for the R-2 District do not
constrain the development of duplexes. The 30-foot height
limit is appropriate because many R-2 zoned areas abut
single-family residential development. Furthermore, 30
feet in height is sufficient for duplex development. The 40
percent maximum lot coverage has also not constrained
the development of duplexes in Cupertino. None of the
residential opportunity sites included in this Housing
Element fall within the R-2 zone.
R-3 Multi-Family Residential
The R-3 District permits multi-family residential
development. This District requires a minimum lot area of
9,300 square feet for a development with three dwelling
units and an additional 2,000 square feet for every
additional dwelling unit. The minimum lot width in the
R-3 District is 70 feet, and lot coverage may not exceed
40 percent of net lot area. For single-story structures,
required setbacks are 20 feet in the front yard, six feet in
the side yard, and the greater of 20 feet or 20 percent of
lot depth in the rear yard; the minimum side yard setback
for two-story structures is nine feet. The maximum height
any building is two stories and may not exceed 30 feet.
This height limit is used because many R-3 districts abut
single-family residential neighborhoods. Basements (fully
submerged below grade except for lightwells required for
light, ventilation and emergency egress, which may have a
maximum exterior wall height of two feet between natural
grade and ceiling) are permitted and are not counted
towards the height requirements. For these reasons, the
height standards in the R-3 district are not considered
a constraint to housing production. Furthermore, the
development standards for the R-3 District are on par with
standards present in neighboring jurisdictions.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g -7 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupertino
The development standards for the R-3 District do not
unreasonably constrain the development of multi-family
housing. Multi-family residential uses are permitted uses
in the R-3 District without the need for a Use Permit.
Developments are able to achieve close to the maximum
allowable densities under existing development standards,
including the height limit and maximum lot coverage.
This can be demonstrated by a back-of-the-envelope
calculation of the number of developable units on a one-
acre parcel. As shown in Table 4.2, the maximum density
allowed on a one-acre parce) is 20 units. With a maximum
lot coverage of 40 percent and assuming two stories of
residential development, approximately 35,000 square
feet of residential development can be achieved. Using
conservative assumptions of 20 percent common area space
and large unit sizes of 1,400 square feet, 20 units can be
developed under this scenario. This analysis demonstrates
that projects would be able to achieve the maximum
allowable density in the R-3 District under the development
standards.
This Housing Element includes a strategy to monitor the
development standards to facilitate a range of housing
options (Strategy 1 - See General Plan Chapter 4: Housing
Element).
RHS Residential Hi Iside
The RHS District regulates development in the hillsides
to balance residential uses with the need to preserve the
natural setting and protect life and property from natural
hazards. Dwelling unit density is determined by the slope-
density standards outlined in the General Plan. Minimum lot
size ranges from 20,000 square feet to 400,000 square feet.
The minimum lot width in the RHS District is 70 feet, with an
exception for lots served by a private driveway and which
do not adjoin a public street. Development applications in
the RHS District must include topographical information,
g_ g HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
4:.-k.tiFa..e.. —
Parcel Size (Sq. Ft.) 43,560
9,300 sq. ft. of lot area
Maximum Density 20.13 for 3 units, 2,000 sq. ft.
for each additional unit.
Parking and circulation (sq. ft.)19,602 Parking and circulation 45% of lot area
Open space (sq. ft.) 6,534 Open space 15% of lot area
Lot Coverage (sq. ft.) 17,424 Lot Coverage % 40% of lot area
Residential Sq. Ft. 34,848 Stories of Residential 2
Less Common Area (hallways,6.970) Common Area %
ZO% of total building
stairs) area
Sq. Ft. for Units 27,878
Number of Units 20 Unit Size (Sq. Ft.) 1,400
Source:City of Cupertino,2014.
including whether the proposed structure is on or in the
site line of a prominent ridgeline. The City has established
a process to allow for exceptions to development
requirements in the RHS zone if certain stated findings can
be made.
R-1C Residential Single Family Cluster
The purpose of the R-1 C District is to provide a means
for reducing the amount of street improvements and
public utilities required in residential development, to
conserve natural resources, and encourage more creative
development and efficient use of space. The owner of
a property within Cupertino may submit an application
for single-family residential cluster zoning or rezoning
to the Planning Commission. Alternatively, the Planning
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-7 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
Cfty of Cupertino
Commission and/or the City Council may initiate a public
hearing to rezone specific properties to the R-1 C District.
The allowable density on a parcel is determined by the
existing land use designations in place prior to the rezoning.
Density ranges are determined based on the relationship
with and impacts to surrounding neighborhoods, streets,
infrastructure and natural areas as well as the quality of
design and relationship to adopted Housing Element goals.
While the maximum height in the district is 30 feet, a height
increase may be permitted if the City Council or Planning
Commission determines that it would not have an adverse
impact on the immediately adjacent neighborhood. The
R-1 C District also regulates site design and private streets
within the cluster. Development requirements for proposed
R-1 C developments can be waived or modified, if the
Planning Commission and City Council find that the site is
constrained but substantially meets the zoning standards
or if the proposal provides for low-moderate income and
senior citizen housing.
Planned Development
The P district is intended to provide a means for guiding
land development that is uniquely suited for planned
coordination of land uses and to provide for a greater
flexibility of land use intensity and design. The planned
development zoning district is specifically intended
to encourage variety in the development pattern of
the community; to promote a more desirable living
environment; to encourage creative approaches in land
development; to provide a means of reducing the amount
of improvements required in development through better
design and land planning, to conserve natural features, to
facilitate a more aesthetic and efficient use of open spaces,
and to encourage the creation of public or private common
open space.
g_g p NCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housi g Eiement Technical Report
All P districts are identified on the zoning map with the
letter P followed by a specific reference to the type of use
allowed in the particular planned development district.
For example, a P(Res) district allows for residential uses.
Developments within a P district are generally required to
comply with the height and density regulations associated
with the underlying use. Additionally, the P District contains
specific provisions allowing the densities shown on sites
designated as Priority Housing Sites. Beyond density
and height regulations, the P district allows for a greater
degree of flexibility around other development standards.
The increased flexibility in the P zones allow a project to
be designed to the special characteristics of a site (such
as corner parcels, proximity to a creek or open space, etc)
without requiring variances or exceptions. Such sites can
include a combination of multiple housing types, open
space and a mix of uses in a single area. Examples include
the Main Street Cupertino and Rose Bowl mixed use
developments.
A majority of the housing sites proposed to accommodate
the RHNA are located in the P district, which speciifically
allows the densities shown on these sites. The majority of
the P districts are governed by a Specific or Conceptual
Plan which provides additional guidance to facilitate
development review and provide more certainty regarding
community expectations. For example, the Heart of the City
Specific Plan provides detailed guidelines for residential
and mixed-use developments (including orientation,
design, setbacks, landscaping, buffers, and transitions to
neighboring properties).
Prior to development within a P (Res/R3) district, applicants
must submit a definitive development plan to the Planning
Commission or City Council. Upon recommendation
of the Planning Commission, the City Council reviews
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT hiOUSING ELEMENT g.g 1
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
larger developments, including those with eight or more
residential units. Multi-family residential developments
within a P(Res/R3) district are permitted uses by right.
Development plans focus on site and architectural merits
and typically take between two to four months to obtain
approvals. The Municipal Code was amended in 2011
to clarify that the development plan for residential uses
only requires a planned development permit and not a
conditional use permit as residential developments are
permitted uses within a P(Res) district.
A Agricultural and A-1 Agricultural-Residential
Agricultural zones are intended to preserve agriculture or
forestry activities in areas suited to that purpose, and to
include incidental residential development of a rural or
semi-rural character. Single-family dwellings and residences
for farmworkers and their families are permitted in the A and
A-1 Districts.
Minimum lot area corresponds to the number (multiplied by
one thousand square feet) following the A zoning symbol.
For example, A1-43 requires a minimum 43,000 square
foot lot. The minimum lot size for the A District is 215,000
square feet (with or without incidental residential use) and
215,000 square feet for A-1 with no incidental residential
use. Incidental residential uses require a minimum of 43,000
square feet per dwelling unit. The District requires setbacks
of 30 feet in the front yard, 20 feet in the side yards, and
20-25 feet in the rear yard. The maximum building height
of 28 feet allows for a wide range of single family housing
types on flat terrain. Structures in the A District with an "i"
designation at the end are limited to one story (18 feet).
Other Districts
In addition to the districts discussed above, limited
residential uses are allowed in other zoning districts. Often
g_g 2 NCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
the housing in these non-residential districts is limited
to housing for employees or caretakers. The permitted
residential uses in non-residential districts are discussed
below.
ML Light Industrial
Residential dwellings for caretakers or watchmen are
permitted for those employed for the protection of the
principal light industrial permitted use. The residential
dwellings must be provided on the same lot as the principal
permitted use.
PR Park and Recreation
The PR District regulates publicly owned parks within the
City. Single-family residences for the purpose of housing
a caretaker for the park are permitted in this District. A
caretaker is defined as a person who maintains surveillance
of the park areas during and after the hours of park
operation. The residence may take the form of a mobile
home or a permanent residential structure.
Heart of the City
The Heart of the City Specific Plan provides specific
development guidance for one of the most important
commercial corridors in the City of Cupertino. This Specific
Plan is intended to carefully guide development, with the
purpose of creating a clear sense of place and community
identity in Cupertino. The Specific Plan contains streetscape
design, development standards and design guidelines for
multi-unit residential and commercial/office projects.
Any new residential development within the Heart of the
City Specific Plan area is required to include a nonresidential
component (that is, horizontal or vertical mixed use is
required if residential uses are proposed). For mixed use
developments in the Heart of the City Specific Plan area,
HCD REV EWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g_g 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupertino
residential development density calculations are required
to be based on net density, excluding parking and/
or land areas devoted to the commercial portion of the
development. This requirement can significantly reduce the
number of units a proposed project may provide, and may
constrain new development, although it will forward City
goals for balanced and complementary land uses. However,
for sites designated as Priority Housing Sites in the Housing
Element, the P District has been amended to allow the
densities shown in the Housing Element as a permitted use.
Parking
Excessive parking requirements may serve as a constraint
of housing development by increasing development costs
and reducing the amount of land available for project
amenities or additional units. Off-street residential parking
requirements vary by zone. As shown in Table 4.3, the
parking ratio ranges from two parking spaces per dwelling
unit to four spaces per dwelling unit.
a _
Single-Family R-1, RHS, A-1, P 4 / DU (2 garage, 2 open)
Small Lot Single-Family, Townhouse P 2.8 / DU (2 garage, 0.8 open)
Duplex R-2 3 / DU (1.5 enclosed, 1.5 open)
High Density Multi-Family R-3, P Z / DU (1 covered, 1 open)
Source:Cupertino Zoning Ordinance, 2014.
Cupertino's parking requirements are higher than many
other jurisdictions, particularly for single-family homes.
Given the high cost of land and parking, the high parking
standards may serve as a constraint to housing provision,
although projects are able to attain the maximum permitted
density even with these parking requirements. The Zoning
Ordinance does not include parking reductions for senior
housing, affordable housing, or group homes, unless
g_g 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
State Density Bonus law applies, in which case reductions
are available for senior housing and projects that include
affordable housing. Often, vehicle ownership among
elderly and lower-income households is lower than other
populations, making reductions in parking requirements
appropriate. As established in Strategy 11 of this Housing
Element, the City will offer a range of incentives to facilitate
the development of affordable housing, including parking
standards waivers.
The Zoning Ordinance allows for shared parking in
mixed-use developments. For example, residential
projects with a retail or commercial component will have
a lower parking requirement because residential users
may use some retail parking spaces in the evening. The
Zoning Ordinance provides a formula for calculating
the parking reduction in mixed-use developments. In
addition, the Planning Commission or City Council
may allow further reduction in the parking requirement
as part of a use permit development plan or parking
exception based on shared parking arrangements,
parking surveys, and parking demand management
measures.
According to interviews conducted as part of the
Housing Element update in 2013, market-rate and non-
profit developers perceive policies and regulations such
as parking requirements, height limits, and variances
for density as barriers to developing and adding units
to the market. One interviewee noted that Cupertino's
parking requirements are relatively stringent compared
to other cities on the Peninsula that are moving towards
more flexibility and lower requirements. To address this
concern, the City offers reduced parking requirements as
incentives to facilitate affordable housing (Strategy 1 1)
and has updated the Density Bonus Ordinance (Strategy
12) consistent with State law to allow for reduced
NCD REViEWED DRAFi HUUSING ELEMENT g_g 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
parking and one to three regulatory concessions that
would result in identifiable cost reductions and which are
needed to make proposed housing affordable.
Provisions for a Variety of Housing Types
Housing element law specifies that jurisdictions must
identify adequate sites through appropriate zoning and
development standards to encourage the development of
various types of housing. This includes single- and multi-
family housing, homeless shelters, group homes, supportive
and transitional housing, SROs, mobile and manufactured
homes, among others.
Homeless Shelters
The Zoning Ordinance allows for permanent and rotating
homeless shelters in the Quasi Public Building (BQ) zone.
Rotating homeless shelters are permitted within existing
church structures in the BQ zone for up to 25 occupants.
The operation period of rotating shelters cannot exceed
two months in any one-year span at a single location.
Permanent emergency shelter facilities are permitted
in the BQ zone if the facility is limited to 25 occupants,
provides a management plan, and if occupancy is limited
to six months or fewer. The City included Strategy 22 in the
Housing Element to ensure continued facilitation of housing
opportunities for special needs persons through emeregency
housing options.
Group Homes and Transitional and Supportive Housing
Pursuant to state law, licensed residential care facilities
for six or fewer residents are permitted by right in all
residential districts (including A, A-1, R-1, R-2, R-3, RHS,
R-1 C). Licensed small group homes are not subject to
special development requirements, policies, or procedures
which would impede such uses from locating in a residential
district. Furthermore, small group homes (with six or fewer
g_g 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
persons) with continuous 24-hour care are permitted by
right in all residential districts. Transitional and supportive
housing is treated as a residential use and subject only
to those restrictions that apply to other residential uses
in the same zone. Large group homes (with more than
six residents) are conditionally permitted uses in the R-1
District, subject to Planning Commission approval.
Single-Room Occupancy Units (SROs)
SRO units are one-room units intended for occupancy by a
single individual. They are distinct from a studio or efficiency
unit, in that a studio is a one-room unit that must contain a
kitchen and bathroom. Although SRO units are not required
to have a kitchen or bathroom, many SROs have one or the
other. The Cupertino Zoning Ordinance does not contain
specific provisions for SRO units. SRO units are treated as a
regular multi-family use, subject to the same restrictions that
apply to other residential uses in the same zone.
Manufactured Housing
Manufactured housing and mobile homes can be an
affordable housing option for low- and moderate-income
households. According to the Department of Finance, as of
2013, there are no mobile homes in Cupertino. Pursuant to
State law, a mobile home built after June 15, 1976, certified
under the National Manufactured Home Construction and
Safety Act of 1974, and built on a permanent foundation
may be located in any residential zone where a conventional
single-family detached dwelling is permitted subject to
the same restrictions on density and to the same property
development regulations.
Farmworker and Employee Housing
Pursuant to the State Employee Housing Act, any employee
housing consisting of no more than 36 beds in a group
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-8 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cuperti o
quarters or 12 units or spaces designed for use by a single
family or household shall be deemed an agricultural land
use. No conditional use permit, zoning variance, or other
zoning clearance shall be required of this employee housing
that is not required of any other agricultural activity in the
same zone. The permitted occupancy in employee housing
in a zone allowing agricultural uses shall include agricultural
employees who do not work on the property where the
employee housing is located. The Employee Housing Act
also specifies that housing for six or fewer employees be
treated as a residential use. In 2014, the City amended the
Zoning Ordinance to be consistent with the State Employee
Housing Act, permitting employee housing for six or fewer
residents in all residential zoning districts and employee
group quarters in the A and A-1 districts, and in the RHS
district with approval of an Administrative CUP.
Second Dwelling Units
A second dwelling unit is an attached or detached, self-
contained unit on a single-family residential lot. These units
are often affordable due to their smaller size. To promote
the goal of affordable housing within the City, Cupertino's
Zoning Ordinance permits second dwelling units on lots in
Single-Family Residential (R-1), Residential Hillside (RHS),
Agricultural (A), and Agricultural Residential (A-1) Districts.
Second dwelling units on lots of 10,000 square feet or
more may not exceed 800 square feet, while units on lots
smaller than 10,000 square feet cannot exceed 640 square
feet. All second dwelling units must have direct outside
access without going through the principal dwelling. If the
residential lot encompasses less than 10,000 square feet,
the second dwelling unit must be attached to the principal
dwelling unless otherwise approved by the Director of
Community Development through Architectural Review.
Second dwelling units are subject to an architectural review
g_g g HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
by the Director of Community Development. The design
and building materials of the proposed second unit must
be consistent with the principal dwelling. In addition, the
second dwelling unit may not require excessive grading
which is visible from a public street or adjoining private
property. The architectural review is done at the ministerial
building permit) level and is intended to ensure that the
second unit is consistent with the architecture, colors, and
materials of the primary house.
One additional ofF-street parking space must be provided if
the principal dwelling unit has less than the minimum ofF-
street parking spaces for the residential district in which it is
located. Second dwelling units must also comply with the
underlying site development regulations specified by the
zoning district.
Density Bonus
State law requires cities and counties to grant a density
bonus of up to 35 percent and one to three incentives or
concessions to housing projects which contain one of the
following:
At least 5% of the housing units are restricted to very low
income residents
At least 10% of the housing units are restricted to lower
income residents
At least 10% of the housing units in a for-sale common
interest development are restricted to moderate income
residents
A density bonus, but no incentives or concessions, must be
granted to projects that contain one of the following:
The project donates at least one acre of land to the city
or county large enough for 40 very low income units,
the land has the appropriate general plan designation,
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 8-8 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupertino
zoning, permits and approvals, and access to public
facilities needed for such housing, funding has been
identified, and other requirements are met
The project is a senior citizen housing development (no
affordable units required)
The project is a mobile home park age restricted to
senior citizens (no affordable units required)
The City adopted amendments to the Municipal Code in
2014 to conform with State law. Strategy 12 in the Housing
Plan commits the City to implementation of the Density
Bonus Ordinance.
Site Improvement Requirements
Residential developers are responsible for constructing
road, water, sewer, and storm drainage improvements on
new housing sites. Where a project has off-site impacts,
such as increased runoff or added congestion at a nearby
intersection, additional developer expenses may be
necessary to mitigate impacts. These expenses may be
passed on to consumers.
Chapter 18 of the Cupertino Municipal Code (the
Subdivision Ordinance) establishes the requirements for
new subdivisions, including the provision of on- and off-site
improvements. The ordinance requires that subdivisions
comply with frontage requirements and stormwater runoff
be collected and conveyed by an approved storm drain
system. Furthermore, each unit or lot within the subdivision
must be served by an approved sanitary sewer system,
domestic water system, and gas, electric, telephone, and
cablevision facilities. All utilities within the subdivision and
along peripheral streets must be placed underground.
Common residential street widths in Cupertino range from
20 feet (for streets with no street parking) to 36 feet (for
B-9 0 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING EI.EMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
those with parking on both sides). The City works with
developers to explore various street design options to
meet their needs and satisfy public safety requirements.
Developers are typically required to install curb, gutters,
and sidewalks, however, there is a process where the
City Council can waive the requirement. The City prefers
detached sidewalks with a landscaped buffer in between
the street and the pedestrian walk to enhance community
aesthetics and improve pedestrian safety. However,
the City does work with developers to explore various
frontage improvement options depending on the project
objectives, taking into consideration factors such as tree
preservation, land/design constraints, pedestrian safety,
and neighborhood pattern/compatibility. This is especially
true in Planned Development projects, where the City
works with the developer to achieve creative and flexible
street and sidewalk designs to maximize the project as well
as community benefits. The Subdivision Ordinance also
includes land dedication and fee standards for parkland.
The formula for dedication of park land for residential
development is based on a standard of three acres of
parkland per 1,000 persons. The developer must dedicate
parkland based on this formula or pay an in lieu fee based
on the fair market value of the land.
In addition to parkland dedication, the City Council may
require a subdivider to dedicate lands to the school
district(s) as a condition of approval of the final subdivision
map. If school site dedication is required and the school
district accepts the land within 30 days, the district must
repay the subdivider the original cost of the dedicated land
plus the cost of any improvements, taxes, and maintenance
of the dedicated land. If the school district does not accept
the offer, the dedication is terminated.
The developer may also be required to reserve land for a
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 6-9 1
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
park, recreational facility, fire station, library, or other public
use if such a facility is shown on an adopted specific plan
or adopted general plan. The public agency benefiting
from the reserved land shall pay the developer the market
value of the land at the time of the filing of the tentative
map and any other costs incurred by the developer in the
maintenance of the area. The ordinance states that the
amount of land to be reserved shall not make development
of the remaining land held by the developer economically
unfeasible.
The City of Cupertino`s site improvement requirements for
new subdivisions are consistent with those in surrounding
jurisdictions and do not pose a significant constraint to new
housing development.
Building Codes and Code Enforcement
The City of Cupertino has adopted the 2013 Edition of
the California Building Code, the 2013 California Electrical
Code and Uniform Administrative Code Provisions, the
International Association of Plumbing Officials Uniform
Plumbing Code (2013 Edition), the California Mechanical
Code 2013 Edition, and the 2013 California Fire Code and
the 2013 Green Building Standard Code. The City also
enforces the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Housing Code, the
1998 Uniform Code for Building Conservation, and the 1997
Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings
Code.
Cupertino has adopted several amendments to the 2013
California Building Code. The City requires sprinkler systems
for new and expanded one- and two-family dwellings and
townhouses; underhanging appendages enclosed with
fire-resistant materials; roof coverings on new buildings
and replacement roofs complying with the standards
established for Class A roofing, the most fire resistant type
of roof covering. The amendments also establish minimum
g_q 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Tech cal Report
standards for building footings, seismic reinforcing on
attached multi-family dwellings, and brace wall panel
construction. These amendments apply more stringent
requirements than the California Building Code. The
California Building Code and the City's amendments to it
have been adopted to prevent unsafe or hazardous building
conditions. The City's building codes are reasonable and
would not adversely affect the ability to construct housing in
Cupertino.
The City's code enforcement program is an important tool
for maintaining the housing stock and protecting residents
from unsafe or unsightly conditions. The Code Enforcement
Division is responsible for enforcing the provisions of the
Cupertino Municipal Code and various other related codes
and policies. Code Enforcement Division staff work to
achieve compliance through intervention, education, and
enforcement, partnering with the community to enforce
neighborhood property maintenance standards.
Code Enforcement staff investigate and enforce City codes
and State statutes based on complaints received. Violation
of a code regulation can result in a warning, citation, fine,
or legal action. If a code violation involves a potential
emergency, officers will respond immediately; otherwise,
Code Enforcement stafF responds to complaints through
scheduled inspections. The City has had to declare only
three units unfit for human occupancy since 2007 and most
complaints are resolved readily. Code Enforcement activities
are not considered a constraint to development of housing
in Cupertino.
Constraints for Persons with Disabilities
California Senate Bill 520 (SB 520), passed in October 2001,
requires local housing elements to evaluate constraints
for persons with disabilities and develop programs which
accommodate the housing needs of disabled persons.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-9 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Procedures for Ensuring Reasonable Accommodation
Both the federal Fair Housing Act and the California Fair
Employment and Housing Act impose an affirmative
duty on cities and counties to make reasonable
accommodations in their zoning and land use policies
when such accommodations are necessary to provide
equal access to housing for persons with disabilities and do
not impose significant administrative or financial burdens
on local government or undermine the fundamental
purpose of the zoning law. Reasonable accommodations
refer to modifications or exemptions to particular policies
that facilitate equal access to housing. Examples include
exemptions to setbacks for wheelchair access structures or
to height limits to permit elevators.
The City of Cupertino adopted an ordinance in April
2010 for people with disabilities to make a reasonable
accommodations request. Chapter 19.25 provides a
procedure to request reasonable accommodation for
persons with disabilities seeking equal access to housing
under the Federal Fair Housing Act, the Federal Fair
Housing Amendments Act of 1988, and the California Fair
Employment and Housing Act.
Zoning and Other Land Use Regulations
In conformance to state law, licensed residential care
facilities for six or fewer residents are permitted by right
in all residential districts (including A, A-1, R-1, R-2, R-3,
RHS, R-1 C). Licensed small group homes are not subject to
special development requirements, policies, or procedures
which would impede such uses from locating in a residential
district. Furthermore, small group homes (with six or fewer
persons) with continuous 24-hour care are permitted
by right in all residential districts, as are transitional and
supportive housing. Large group homes (with more than
six residents) are conditionally permitted uses in the R-1
District, subject to Planning Commission approval.
B-9 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSWG ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
The Zoning Ordinance contains a broad definition of family.
A family means an individual or group of persons living
together who constitute a bona fide single housekeeping
unit in a dwelling unit. Families are distinguished from
groups occupying a hotel, lodging club, fraternity or sorority
house, or institution of any kind. This definition of family
does not limit the number of people living together in a
household and does not require them to be related.
Building Codes and Permitting
The City's Building Code does not include any amendments
to the California Building Code that might diminish the
ability to accommodate persons with disabilities.
Below Market Rate Mitigation Program
The City's BMR Residential Mitigation Program requires all
new residential developers to either provide below market
rate units or pay a mitigation fee, which is placed in the
City's Below Market-Rate (BMR) Affordable Housing Fund
AHF). The BMR Mitigation Program is based on a nexus
study prepared by the City that demonstrated that all new
developments create a need for affordable housing. Under
this program, developers of for-sale housing where units
may be sold individually must sell at least 15 percent of
units at a price affordable to median- and moderate-income
households. Projects of seven or more units must provide
on-site BMR units. Developers of projects of six units or
fewer can either build a unit or provide pay the Housing
Mitigation fee.
To be consistent with recent court decisions and the State
Costa-Hawkins Act regarding rent control, the City modified
the BMR Mitigation Program so that developers of market-
rate rental units, where the units cannot be sold individually,
pay the Housing Mitigation fee to the Affordable Housing
Trust Fund. In 2014, the fee was $3.00 per square foot
on residential. The BMR Office and Industrial Mitigation
Program also acknowledges housing needs created by the
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-9 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
development of office and industrial projects and provide
fees to support the development of affordable housing. In
2014, the fee was $6.00 per square foot on office/industrial,
hotel, and retail, and $3.00 per square foot in the Planned
Industrial zone. 4
Although concerns exist that inclusionary housing programs
like Cupertino's BMR Mitigation Program may constrain
production of market rate homes, studies have shown
evidence to the contrary. The cost of an inclusionary
housing requirement must ultimately be borne by either:
1) developers through a lower return, 2) landowners
through decreased land values, or 3) other homeowners
through higher market rate sale prices. In fact, the cost of
inclusionary housing and any other development fee "will
always be split between all players in the development
process."5 However, academics have pointed out that, over
the long term, it is probable that landowners will bear most
of the costs of inclusionary housing, not other homeowners
or the developer. 6 In addition, a 2004 study on housing
starts between 1981 and 2001 in communities throughout
California with and without inclusionary housing programs
evidences that inclusionary housing programs do not lead to
a decline in housing production. In fact, the study found that
housing production actually increased after passage of local
inclusionary housing ordinances in cities as diverse as San
Diego, Carisbad, and Sacramento.
Recognizing the need for a financially feasible program that
4 The housing mitigation fee is updated periodically.Developers should
check with the Community Development Department for the most current fee
amount.
5 W.A.Watkins. "Impact of Land Development Charges." Land Economics 75(3).
1999.
6 Mallach,A."Inclusionary Housing Programs: Policies and Practices." New
Brunswick, NJ:Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University. 1984. Hagman,
D. "Taking Care of One's Own Through Inclusionary Zoning: Bootstrapping Low-
and Moderate-Income Housing by Local Government," Urban Law and Policy
5:169-187. 1982. Ellickson, R. 1985. "Inclusionary Zoning:Who Pays?" Planning
51(8):18-20.
7 David Rosen. "Inclusionary Housing and Its Impact on Housing and land
Markets." NHC Affordable Housing Policy Review 1(3).2004.
B-9 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Hous ng Element Technical Report
does not constrain production, some jurisdictions allow
developers to pay a fee for all units, regardless of project
size. As discussed previously, Cupertino's BMR Mitigation
Program requires large for-sale developments (with seven or
more units) to provide units.
A 2009 court case (Palmer v. the City of Los Angeles) has
resulted in cities suspending or amending the portion of
their Housing Mitigation program requiring affordable
units to be included in market rate rental developments.
There also have been a number of court cases related
to affordable housing requirements (decided and those
that are still being litigated). Due to uncertainty regarding
the legal standard applicable to affordable housing
requirements, the Governor vetoed an Assembly Bill (AB
1229) which aimed to reverse the decision in the Palmer
case. Currently pending in the California Supreme Court is
a challenge to the City of San Jose's inclusionary ordinance.
The Building Industry Association asserts that all programs
requiring affordable housing, whether for sale or for
rent, must be justified by a nexus study showing that the
affordable housing requirement is "reasonably related"
to the impacts of the project on the need for affordable
housing. In a previous California Supreme Court case,
Sterling Park v. City of Palo Alto, the Court ruled that
affordable housing requirements were a type of exaction
that could be challenged under the protest provisions of the
Mitigation Fee Act.
The City of Cupertino has long justified its Housing
Mitigation program as based on the impacts of market rate
housing on the need for affordable housing and continues
to require rental housing developments to pay a mitigation
fee. However, the fee is based on an older nexus study.
The City intends to update its nexus study on the BMR
mitigation fees by the end of 2015 to determine appropriate
housing mitigation fees (Strategy 8).
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 8-9 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Park Impact Fees
The City assesses park impact fees for new residential
development. The fee ranges from $14,850 per unit of high
density residential development (at 20 dwelling units per
acre or more) and for apartments with ten or more units to
28,875 per single-family unit (where the density is 0 to 5
units per acre). Park impact fees for senior/elderly housing is
4,500 per unit.
Cupertino's park fees are comparable to or lower than
similar requirements established in other Santa Clara County
jurisdictions. Mountain View and San Jose require park
land dedication or the payment of a park in-lieu fee. The
in-lieu fee in both cities is based on fair market value of
the land. San Jose's park fees for single-family detached
units ranged from approximately $15,000 to $38,550,
depending on building square footage and the area of
the city. Park fees for multi-family units in San Jose ranged
from $7,650 to $35,600, depending on location and the
size of the development. In Mountain View, park in-lieu
fees are approximately $25,000 for each residential unit,
depending on the value of the land. The City of Palo Alto's
park dedication requirements vary depending on whether
the project involves a subdivision or parcel map, and
also depending on the size of the unit. Palo Alto collects
10,638-$15,885 per single-family unit and $3,521-$6,963
per multi-family unit.
Fees and Exactions
Like cities throughout California, Cupertino collects
development fees to recover the capital costs of providing
community services and the administrative costs associated
with processing applications. New housing typically requires
payment of school impact fees, sewer and water connection
fees, building permit fees, wastewater treatment plant
fees, and a variety of handling and service charges. Typical
g_q g HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
fees collected are outlined in Table 4.4. The total cost of
permits, city fees, and other professional services fees (such
as project-specific architecture and engineering designs and
schematics) has been estimated to equate to 20 percent
of construction costs, or approximately 10 percent of total
project costs.
The Bay Area Cost of Development Survey 2010-2011
conducted by the City of San Jose surveyed six jurisdictions
in the region with sample development projects to
determine associated entitlement, construction, and impact
fees. For a multi-family development, total fees identified
by this survey ranged from $4,841 per unit for the County
of Santa Clara to $42,183 per unit for the City of Palo Alto.
These fees have likely increased since the time of the survey,
and therefore a conservative indication that Cupertino's
fees (estimated at $30,851 for a similar building type) are
consistent with, and often less than, fees in surrounding
jurisdictions.
Permit Processing
The entitlement process can impact housing production
costs, with lengthy processing of development applications
adding to financing costs, in particular.
Planning Commission and City Council ApProvals
The Planning Commission and City Council review
applications for zoning amendments and subdivision
approvals. The Planning Commission holds a public hearing
about proposed zoning changes or subdivisions and
makes a recommendation to the City Council to approve,
conditionally approve, or deny the application. Upon
receipt of the Planning Commission's recommendation, the
City Council holds a public hearing before making a final
decision on the proposed zoning change or subdivision.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT S-9 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
Cfty of Cupertino
i
I I ii
n M f: i: _ 4 fi
n a
r'J" . ..._
4'
F
wk,x_s A t
n.. ,t,.
76 permit fee or $77.50 with
Sanitary Connection backflow plus additional $300 376 378 378
Permit (d)
inspection fee
Fees based on construction
Water Main Existing costs with large variation depen-
7 000 6,900 2,300
Facilities Fee (e) dent on fire safety requirements
and size of water line.
Parcel Map (1-4 lots) - 7,461 N/A N/A N/A
Planning Fee
Tract Map (> 4 lots) - 15,974 1,597 1,597 N/A
Planning Fee
Residential Design
Review/Architectural 2,400/$7,461 2,400 746 149
and Site Approval
Development Permit 15,974 1,597 1,597 319
Fee
Parcel Map (1-4 lots) - 4,254 N/A N/A N/A
Engineering Fee
Tract Map (> 4 lots) - g,g31 883 883 N/A
Engineering Fee
Engineering Plan 736 368 124
Review Fee
Grading Permit Fee 750 350 601
Master Storm Varies 906 555 378
Drainage Area Fee
Storm Management 715 71.50 71.50 71.50
Plan Fee
Park Impact Fee Varies by density 28,875 16,500 14,850
Housing Mitigation 3.00/ Sq. Ft. 6,000 4,800 4,200
In-Lieu Fee
Cupertino Union 2,02 / Sq. Ft. 4,040 3,232 2,828
School District Fee
Fremont Union High 1.34/ Sq. Ft. 2,680 2,144 1,876
School District Fee
Plan Check
and Inspection 655 655 655 655
Engineering)
Building Permit Fee (f) Based on scope of project 7,409 6,473 2,121
Total (g)65,976 47,250 30,851
Notes:
a)Fees estimated for a 3,150 square foot, 3 bedroom home in a 10 unit subdivision with 7,000 sq. ft. lots over 2 acres.
b)Fees estimated for a 2,200 square foot, 3 bedroom/2.5 bathroom townhouse in a 10 unit subdivision over one acre.
c)Fees estimated for a SO unit apartment development with 1,680 gross square foot(1,400 net),2 bedroom apartment units over 2.2 acres
d)Average of fees charged in the four Cupertino Sanitary District zones.
e)Connectiom fee for San Jose Water, which serves the largest area of Cupertino. Cal Water and Cupertino Municipal also serve parts of the City.
fl Includes all fees payable to the Building Department. Includes Plan check and standard inspection fees, and Construction Tax.
g)Reflects 2014 adopted fees. Fees are subject to change.
Sources: City of Cupertino,2014;San Jose Water,2014;Cupertino Sanitary District, 2014;MIG 2014
8-1 0 0 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Local developers have noted that the entitlement process
in Cupertino can be a time consuming and protracted
process. While the active public may add complexity to the
entitlement process, Cupertino values public outreach and
is committed to development of community leadership,
local partnerships, an active populace and making
government more accessible and visible to residents.
Design Review
Cupertino has not adopted citywide residential design
guidelines. However, all Planned Development Zoning
Districts, the R1 District, RHS District, the Heart of the
City Specific Plan Area, and the North De Anza Boulevard
Conceptual Plan Area are subject to design guidelines.
These design guidelines pertain to features such as
landscaping, building and roof forms, building entrances,
colors, outdoor lighting, and building materials. The design
guidelines are intended to ensure development is consistent
with the existing neighborhood character and are generally
not considered significant constraints to housing production.
The Heart of the City Specific Plan design guidelines
are intended to promote high-quality private-sector
development, enhance property values, and ensure that
both private investment and public activity continues to
be attracted to the Stevens Creek Boulevard Special Area.
Design guidelines promote retention and development
viability of single-family residential sized lots in the
transition area between Stevens Creek Boulevard fronting
development and single-family neighborhoods.
The City requires design review for certain residential
developments to ensure that new development and
changes to existing developments comply with City
development requirements and policies. These include:
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 01
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Variances in the R-1 District
Two-story residential developments in the R-1 District
where second floor to first floor area ration is greater
than 66 percent and/or where second story side yard
setback(s) are less than 15 feet to a property line
Two-story addition, new two-story home, and/or second
story deck in the R1-a zone
Any new development or modifications in planned
development residential or mixed-use residential zoning
districts
Single-family homes in a planned development
residential zoning district
Modifications to buildings in the R1-C or R-2 zoning
districts
Signs, landscaping, parking plans, and modifications to
buildings in the R-3 zoning district
The City has detailed Two-Story Design Principles
incorporated in the R-1 District. These design principles
help integrate new homes and additions to existing homes
with existing neighborhoods by providing a framework for
the review and approval process. Two-story homes with a
second story to first floor ratio greater than 66 percent and
homes with second story side setbacks less than 15 feet
must offset building massing with designs that encompass
higher quality architectural features and materials.
Design Review may occur at the Staff or Design Review
Committee level, depending on the scope of the project.
Staff and the Design Review Committee, consisting of the
Planning Commission Vice Chair and one other Planning
Commissioner, consider factors such as building scale in
relation to existing buildings, compliance with adopted
B-1 0 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
height limits, setbacks, architectural and landscape design
guidelines, and design harmony between new and existing
buildings to determine design compliance.
x
s • • • • s
6
rt +:ti '
Ministerial Review 2-4 weeks
Two-Story Residential Permit 2-3 months
Conditional Use Permit 2-4 months
Zoning Change 4-b months
General Plan Amendment 4-6 months
Architectural and Site Review 2-4 months
Design Review 2-3 months
Tentative or Parcel Map 2-4 months
Initial Environmental Study Z months
Negative Declaration 3-6 months
Environmental Impact Report 9-15 months
Notes:
a)Processing time accounts for time involved in the preliminary consultation and/or conceptual review phase
Applications for multiple approval typ es may be processed concurrently. Processing time would depend on time
required to prepare environmental documents. Sources:City of Cupertino,2014
Processing Time
Table 4.5 presents the typical permit processing time
for various approvals in Cupertino. As shown, actions
requiring ministerial review are usually approved within
two to four weeks. Other approvals have longer processing
time frames. Developments requiring multiple approvals
involve joint applications and permits that are processed
concurrently. All approvals for a particular project are
reviewed in a single Planning Commission and/or City
Council meeting. The typical permit processing times
in Cupertino are similar to or lower than those in other
jurisdictions and do not pose a major constraint to new
development in the City.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 0 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Cupertino is able to process applications in a timely
manner because City staff works closely with applicants
during a pre-application process. The pre-application is
free of charge and its duration may vary depending on the
completeness and/or the complexity of the project. Typical
pre-application process may consist of the following:
Initial preliminary consultation with property owners/
developers to go over project objectives and City
development standards
Submittal and review of conceptual development plans
Preliminary consultations with relevant City departments
i.e., Fire, Building, Public Works) as deemed necessary
Submittal and review of pre-submittal materials and final
plans
Table 4.6 summarizes the typical approvals required for
various housing types. One-story single-family homes in
properly zoned areas do not require approvals from the
Community Development Department. However, two-story
single-family homes require a two-story permit, which are
approved by the Director of the Community Development
Department and take two to three months to process.
Residential subdivisions require a tentative parcel map or
tentative subdivision map, depending on the number of
units in the development, and take two to four months to
receive approvals. Multi-family residential developments
in R3 or Planned Development (PD) Districts are typically
approved in two to four months.
Building Permit
Standard plan check and building permit issuance for
single-family dwellings in Cupertino takes approximately 10
B-1 0 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Hous ng Element Technical Report
Single-Family
One-Story
Building Permit 2-4 weeks
No Planning Permit required)
One-Story(Minor Residential or Minor Residential Permit/ R1 Exception 1-2 monthsExceptionPermitrequired)
Two-Story Two-Story Permit 2-3 months
Residential Hillside Building Permit 2-b weeksnoException)
Residential Hillside Hillside Exception 2-3 monthswithException)
Su6division:.
5 units Tentative Parcel Map 2-3 months
5 units Tentative Subdivision Map 3-4 months
Mu1ti-Family— R2, R3
No re-zoning
Development Permit, Architectural Site
2_3 months
Approval
5 parcels Tentative Parcel Map 2-3 months
5 parcels Tentative Subdivision Map 3-4 months
Rezoning Application
Development Permit, Architectural Site
Re-zoning Approval 4-b months
Tentative or Parcel Map (depending on
number of parcels)
Multi-Family— PD
Development Permit
No re-zoning Architectural Site Approval 3-4 months
Tentative or Parcel Map
Zoning change
Development Permit
Re-zoning 4-b months
Architectural Site Approval
Tentative or Parcel Map
May vary based on on level of Environmental Review required.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 0 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
business days. Plan checks for large additions, remodels,
and major structural upgrades for single-family homes
are also processed within 10 days. If a second review is
necessary, the City will take approximately five business
days to complete the review. Prior to the final building
permit inspection for two-story additions and new two-story
homes, applicants must submit a privacy protection plan,
which illustrates how views into neighboring yards second
story windows will be screened by new trees and/or shrubs.
The plan check process may take longer for projects which
entail off-site street improvements.
Over-the-counter plan checks are available for small
residential projects (250 square feet or less). Building
Department staff typically review these projects in less than
30 minutes during normal business hours. In addition, an
express plan check is offered for medium-sized residential
projects (500 square feet or less) and takes approximately
five days. Plan review can take from four weeks to several
months for larger projects, depending on the size.
Examples of this type of plan check include apartments
and single-family residential subdivisions over 10 units.
Cupertino's buiiding permit procedures are reasonable and
comparable to those in other California communities.
Tree Preservation
The City of Cupertino has a Protected Tree Ordinance
that is intended to preserve trees for their environmental,
economic and aesthetic importance. The City seeks to
retain as many trees as possible, consistent with the
individual rights to develop, maintain, and enjoy their
property.
The ordinance protects heritage trees, which are
identified as significant for their historic value or unique
characteristics, and certain trees that have a minimum
single-trunk diameter of 10 inches or a minimum multi-truck
B-1 0 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
diameter of 20 inches when measured at 4.5 feet from
natural grade. These trees include native oak tree species,
California Buckeye, Big Leaf Maple, Deodar Cedar, Blue
Atlas Cedar, Bay Laurel or California Bay, and Western
Sycamore trees.
Trees protected by this ordinance may not be removed
from private or public property without first obtaining a
tree removal permit. Applications for tree removal permits
are reviewed by the Community Development Director.
The Director may approve, conditionally approve, or deny
applications. In some cases, the City may require tree
replacement as a condition of permit approval.
Because a large share of residential development in
Cupertino involves infill development involving demolition
and replacement, building footprints are often already in
place and tree preservation issues do not often arise as a
major concern to developers.
4.2 Economic and Market Constraints
In addition to governmental constraints, non-governmental
factors may constrain the production of new housing. These
could include economic and market related conditions such
as land and construction costs.
Availability of Financing
While the housing market has rebounded since the
recession that began in 2008, many developers still face
difficulty securing project financing. In interviews completed
as part of the Housing Element update process in 2013,
it was stated that small developers in particular still have
trouble, and some lenders do not understand how to
finance mixed-use development.
Project Funding
In stakeholder interviews in late 2013, affordable housing
developers and service providers discussed the hardships
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g_ p 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
caused by the dissolution of the Redevelopment Agencies.
This action eliminated a major source of funding for
affordable housing, and that these funds have not yet been
replaced by other tools. Federal and state funding sources
including Sections 202 and 811) have been eliminated or
reduced so there is greater reliance on local sources.
Land Availability and Costs
Land costs in Cupertino are very high due to high demand
and extremely limited supply of available land. Cupertino
has seen a number of smaller detached infill housing
projects where single-family homes are constructed on
remnant lots or lots that have previously been developed
with older homes. Multi-family development often requires
lot consolidation and/or removing existing uses. A review
of available real estate listings indicated one residentially
zoned vacant property for sale as of May 2014. This 0.22
acre property is zoned P(R-3) and had a listed price of
1,095,000. Based on this listing, an acre of residentially
zoned land could be listed at close to $5 million.
Construction Costs
Construction costs vary significantly depending on building
materials and quality of finishes. Parking structures for
multi-family developments represent another major variable
in the development cost. In general, below-grade parking
raises costs significantly. Soft costs (architectural and other
professional fees, land carrying costs, transaction costs,
construction period interest, etc.) comprise an additional
10 to 40 percent of the construction and land costs.
Owner-occupied multi-family units have higher soft costs
than renter-occupied units due to the increased need for
construction defect liability insurance. Permanent debt
financing, site preparation, off-site infrastructure, impact
fees, and developer profit add to the total development
cost of a project. Construction costs run about $100 per
B-1 0 8 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technfcal Report
square foot for Type 5 construction (wood and stucco over
parking) for multi-family units and $110 per square foot for
single family units8. Residential developers indicate that
construction costs in the Bay Area may far exceed these
national averages, and can reach $200 per square foot for
larger (four- to six-story) developments.
Key construction costs have risen nationally in conjunction
with economic recovery and associated gains in the
residential real estate market. Figure B-6 illustrates
construction cost trends for key materials based on the
Producer Price Index, a series of indices published by the
U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics that
measures the sales price for specific commodities and
products. Both steel and lumber prices have risen sharply
since 2009, as have finished construction products.
4.3. Environmental, Infrastructure & Public
Service Constraints
Environmental Constraints
The majority of Cupertino land area has been urbanized
and now supports roadways, structures, other impervious
surfaces, areas of turf, and ornamental landscaping. In
general, urbanized areas tend to have low to poor wildlife
habitat value due to replacement of natural communities,
fragmentation of remaining open space areas and parks,
and intensive human disturbance. There are no significant
wetland or environmental resource issues of concern that
would constrain development in areas designated for
residential development in Cupertino.
Roads
Due to the urbanized nature of Cupertino, existing
roads are in place to serve the potential infill residential
8 International Code Council Building Valuation Data for Type V construction,
February 2014
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-1 0 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Figure B-5
Producer Price Index for Key Construction Costs
Producer Price Index: Steel and Lumber
X 240
a
220
m 200
u
a 180 Steel
a 160 Lumber
u
140
0
a 120
100
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Year
Producer Price Index: Construction Materials
os.o
x
106.0
c
v 104.0
Final Demand
a
1p2_p Construction
v3
Q.
Q
98.0
201Q 2011 2012 2013
Year
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics,2014; MIG, 2014
B-1 1 0 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
development identified in this Housing Element. The
amount of traffic or congestion on a roadway is measured
in terms of Level of Service (LOS) ranging from A to F, with
A representing intersections that experience little or no
congestion and F representing intersections with long and
unacceptable delays. Cupertino has established a policy of
maintaining a minimum of LOS D for major intersections
during the morning and afternoon peak traffic hours, with
some exceptions. The LOS standard for the Stevens Creek
and De Anza Boulevard intersection, the Stevens Creek and
Stelling Road intersection, and the De Anza Boulevard and
Bollinger Road intersection is LOS E+.
The environmental assessment of individual residential
projects considers any associated trafFic impacts. If the
study finds that the project could cause an intersection
to deteriorate, mitigation may be required. This usually
consists of improvements to adjacent roads and
intersections, but may also include changes to the number
of units in the project, or to site design and layout.
However, SB 743, signed into law in 2013, started a process
that could fundamentally change transportation impact
analysis as part of CEQA compliance. These changes will
include the elimination of auto delay, level of service (LOS),
and other similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic
congestion as a basis for determining significant impacts in
many parts of California (if not statewide). As such, potential
costs to new development associated with roadway
mitigation may be reduced or eliminated.
Wate r
Two water suppliers provide service to the City: the
California Water Company and the San Jose Water
Company. The San Jose Water Company also has a lease
agreement to operate and maintain the City of Cupertino's
water system until 2022. Both of these providers derive
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 1 1
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupertino
the vast majority of their water from the Santa Clara
Valley Water District. According to the 2014 General
Plan Amendment and Housing Element EIR, California
Water Company and San Jose Water Company have
sufficient water supplies to accommodate increased
growth associated with the GPA and Housing Element
under normal, single dry, or multiple dry years. Future
development associated with the Housing Element would
be located within already developed urban areas and
would therefore connect to an existing water distribution
system. No new water treatment facilities or the expansion
of existing facilities would be required to accommodate the
RHNA.
Wastewater
Cupertino Sanitary District (CSD) serves as the main
provider of wastewater collection and treatment services
for Cupertino, while the City of Sunnyvale serves a small
portion of the Cupertino Urban Service area on the
east side of the city. The City of Sunnyvale Wastewater
Treatment Plant has a daily treatment capacity of 29 mgd
capacity, of which approximately 15 mgd are being utilized
in 2014. The CSD has a contractual treatment allocation
with the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Poilution Control
Plant of 7.85 million gallon per day (mgd), on average.
Current wastewater flow to San Jose/Santa Clara Water
Pollution Control Plant is 5.3 mgd. The CSD prepared a
flow capacity analysis in 2008 and determined that 0.6 mgd
capacity remained for development beyond that previously
allocated and planned for under the General Plan. The
2014 General Plan Amendment and Housing Element EIR
identifies this as a significant and unavoidable impact, as
the combined 2014 project would generate an estimated
1.45 mgd of wastewater flows upon buildout, resulting
in a deficit of 0.85 mgd beyond the current contractually
available treatment capacity. However, both the SJ/
B- 1 1 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
SCWPCP and City of Sunnyvale treatment plants have
excess capacity that could potentially treat new wastewater
flows associated with development pursuant to Housing
Element policy.
With regard to sewer capacity, some capacity deficiencies
exist in certain areas of Cupertino, including sewer lines
serving the City Center area and lines on Stelling Road
and Foothill Boulevard. To accommodate wastewater
from major new developments, the lines running at or
new capacity in these areas will have to be upgraded.
Under current practice, the CSD requires developers of
substantial projects to demonstrate that adequate capacity
exists, or to identify and fund the necessary mitigations.
CSD is, as of 2014, performing a capacity analysis of
their entire collection system. Improvements required to
mitigate system deficiencies as well as to accommodate
future development will be identified and added to their
Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Capacity fees will
then be developed to fund the CIP. New development that
increases wastewater transmission and treatment demand
would be required to contribute towards system capacity
enhancement improvements through payment of the
capacity fee. In this manner, CSD would be responsible for
upgrading their system rather than placing the responsibility
on the developers of the largest wastewater generators, as
is currently the case. If and when this fee is developed and
implemented, it will create a more reliable and equitable
mitigation for new development.
Storm Drainage
Cupertino's storm drain system consists of underground
pipelines that carry surface runoff from streets to prevent
flooding. Runoff enters the system at catch basins found
along curbs near street intersections and is discharged into
City creeks. The capacity of the storm drain facilities within
Cupertino was evaluated and documented in the 1993
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 1 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Storm Drain Master Plan, which identifies the areas within
the system that do not have the capacity to handle runoff
during the 10-year storm event, which is the City's design
standard. The City requires that all new developments
conform to this standard.
Open Space
Cupertino's General Plan outlines a policy of having
parkland equal to three acres for every 1,000 residents.
Currently, Cupertino has approximately 162 acres of
parkland. Future development in Cupertino would increase
the need for new park land. The General Plan identified
an additional 49 acres of potential neighborhood and
community parks, which would be more than enough
to maintain the standard of three acres for every 1,000
residents. In addition, Cupertino's park impact fees of
8,100 to $15,750 per unit would generate funding for
the City to purchase new parkland and maintain existing
recreational resources.
Community Acceptance
Other constraints to housing production in the City include
community acceptance, specifically concerns about impacts
on the school districts, traffic, and parks. In particular,
neighbors have indicated resistance to the development
of buildings taller than two stories. Density and height are
more acceptable if buildings are well designed and along
corridors or adjacent to higher-density development.
In 2013 interviews, many stakeholders indicated that multi-
family projects tend to generate community opposition and
that there is some general fear of growth and increased
density in the City. Opposition from the community tends
to increase with the size and height of the project, as well
as the proximity to existing single-family neighborhoods.
To facilitate residential development and meet the RHNA
for this fifth cycle update, the City conducted an extensive
6- 1 1 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
community outreach process to identify appropriate and
feasible sites for residential and mixed use development
over the next eight years. One of the objectives of this
process is to address community concerns.
Schools
Cupertino Union School District (CUSD) and Fremont Union
High School District (FUHSD) are among the best in the
state. In addition, a portion of the City, in the northeast
corner, is also served by the Santa Clara Unified School
District. Residents are particularly concerned about the
impacts of new housing on schools. However, State law
Government Code Section 65995[3][h]) provides that
payment of school impact fees fully mitigates impacts, and
as such, the City's ability to require additional mitigation is
limited by State law.
CUSD is a rapidly growing school district. Enrollment has
increased every year during the last decade, increasing
from 15,575 in the fall of 2001 to 19,058 in the fall of 2013.
CUSD serves students from Cupertino and parts of San
Jose, Sunnyvale, Saratoga, Santa Clara, and Los Altos at 20
elementary schools and five middle schools. Approximately
44 percent of CUSD's students reside in Cupertino. In
total, 3,325 CUSD students (17 percent of total enrollment)
attend schools other than the school of their attendance
area. FUHSD served 10,657 students from Cupertino, most
of Sunnyvale and parts of San Jose, Los Altos, Saratoga,
and Santa Clara. The Santa Clara District is a medium size
district; as a unified district its 15,394 students are spread
from kindergarten through high school.
Operating Costs and Finances
Most of CUSD revenues are tied to the size of enrollment.
The State Department of Education guarantees CUSD a
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-1 1 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
Cfty of Cupertino
certain level of operations funding known as the "revenue
limit." The Revenue Limit is established annually by the
State based on the District's average daily attendance
ADA).
The revenue limit is composed of State funding and local
property tax revenues. If the District's property tax revenue
falls below the revenue limit in any given year, the state will
increase its contribution to make up the difference. CUSD
therefore relies on gradual, steady increases in enrollment
to maintain its financial health over time. Because the
revenue limit makes up the majority of CUSD revenues, and
this limit is tied directly to enrollment, the District needs
predictable, ongoing student growth to keep up with costs.
Declines in enrollment would require the District to cut
costs. The 2013-2014 school year operating budget was
155.6 million. With the total of 19,053 enrolled students
districtwide, the operating cost per student for the school
year was approximately $8,167.
In contrast, FUHSD relies on property taxes for most of its
revenue. FUHSD receives property taxes in excess of its
revenue limit. FUHSD keeps these additional revenues for
operations. As a result, the state does not provide annual
per-ADA funding. Therefore, FUHSD counts on a growing
property tax base to keep up with costs and maintain
per-student funding. New development helps promote a
healthy tax base over time. Multi-family development can
be particularly beneficial to the tax base, generating higher
revenues per acre than single-family homes. This translates
into more revenue for FUHSD. The FUHSD's operating
budget for the school year 2013-2014 was $11 S million.
With the total of 10,657 students enrolled, operating cost
per student was approximately $10,800.
g_ 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEfV1ENT
Appendix B
Hous ng Element Techn cai Report
I . .
Value per Unit (a) 822,500 1,550,000
Density (Units/Acre) 20 5
Total Value/Acre 16,450,000 7,750,000
Property Taxes to FUHSD 27,965 13,175perAcre (b)
Notes:
a)Median sales prices from July 2013 to June 2014
b)FUHSD receives approximately 17%of 1%of assessed value.
Source:School House Services,2014.
Moreover, property taxes from new multi-family housing
can exceed the cost to FUHSD to serve students. Table
4.8 illustrates this point, using previously built projects as
examples. Nonetheless, FUHSD stresses that the impacts
of new residential development should be evaluated on
a case-by-case basis to mitigate any undue effects on the
District.
Enrollment and Facilities
Each of the local school districts expects to continue
growing over the next 10 years. CUSD and FUSD project
that a total of 1,321 new housing units would be built in
Cupertino in the years 2014 through 2023, and expects
enrollment to grow accordingly. It is important to note that
this growth comes from the other cities that the districts
serve, in addition to Cupertino. Cupertino-based students
comprise about 60 percent of enrollment in each district.
In addition to this housing growth, the recent surge in
enrollment at CUSD has been primarily in the younger
grades and these larger classes are now entering middle
school. Accordingly, by 2020 high school enrollment at
FUSD is projected to increase by over 1,000 students.
SCUSD anticipates a 13 percent increase in enrollment by
2023.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B 1 1 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
5 ` s: .
A *
r ;.,- Y fl tii!`e1:.
s: s r.`,: ...
FUHSD REVENUE
Assessed Value of Dev't $ 113,486,674 $ 38,480,698 $ 25,106,837 $ 65,788,586 $ 116,329,797
Property Tax Revenue (a) $ 252,958 85,745 57,086 145,477 258,480
FUHSD COSTS
Number of Students in 2 6 13
Dev't
Cost to Serve Students 75,600 183,600 21,600 64,800 140,400
b)
NET SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) $ 177,358 97,855) 34,486 80,677 118,080
Notes:
a)Percentage of base 1.0 percent property tax FUHSD receives(after ERAF shift)in TRA 13-003: 17%
b)FUHSD Operating Cost per Student, FY 13-14:$10,800
Sources:Santa Clara County Assessor, Enrolment Projections Consultants, School House Services,2014.
The districts will continue to use their facilities efficiently to
accommodate projected growth. CUSD and FUHSD report
that their ability to absorb new students is not unlimited,
and rapid growth does pose a challenge. However, they
will strive to make space and maintain student-teacher
ratios through creative solutions such as relocating special
programs, adjusting schedules, selectively using modular
classrooms, and other approaches. In addition, FUHSD is
developing a plan to dedicate the $198 million raised from
Measure B (authorized in 2008) for facility improvements.
These include athletic facilities, solar power, IT systems,
infrastructure, classrooms, labs, and lecture halls.
The districts also augment their facilities using impact fees
from new development. CUSD receives $2.02 per square
foot in fees from residential development. FUHSD receives
1.34 per square foot from new residential development.
In addition to the development impact fee, voters have
approved multiple bond measures for school facility
improvements. The districts can also address impacts on
g_ g HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Figure B-6
Enrollment Projections, 2008-2013, CUSD and FUHSD
25,000
20,000
j 19,346
E
15,000
t
11,654 .._CUSD
I
FUSD
10,000
i
5,000
i
0 -----t— r--_--,
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
a case-by-case basis, establishing partnerships with home
builders to construct new facilities or expand existing
schools.
Higher-density housing generally generates fewer students
per unit. Table 4.9 illustrates this trend among recently-built
projects in Cupertino. On average, the school districts
report that new single-family homes and townhouses
generate 0.8 K-12 students per unit, while new multi-family
homes generate 0.3 K-12 students per unit. In addition,
most enrollment growth comes from existing homes that
are either sold or rented to families with children, not new
development. Nonetheless, the districts indicate that new
housing will contribute to future demand for classroom
space, which the districts must address through the
strategies outlined above.
A comprehensive analysis of school impacts was completed
as part of the 2014 General Plan Amendment and
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 1 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
r r
i' ._..W _ . . .4 .
Density (Units/Acre) 96 24 30 31
a.::
Students/Unit
CUSD (a) 0.22 0.26 0.29 0.33
FHUSD (a) 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.10
Total 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.43
Notes:
a)Student enrollment data as of October 2013,provided by Enrolment Projection Consultants. Sources:City of
Cupertino; EPC 2014.
2015-2023 Housing Element drafting. Four alternatives
were analyzed, consistent with the Environmental Impact
Report for the combined project. The existing General
Plan and Alternative A would result in the same level of
residential development. Alternatives B and C change the
General Plan designation and zoning for some sites to make
more units possible. The analysis presented here pertains
to the portion of residentia) development estimated to take
place between 2015 and 2023 under each growth scenario,
to be consistent with the Housing Element time period.
The projections in Table 4.10 are based on the rates of
generation of apartments built since 1995 in Cupertino,
which have a relatively small number of middle and high
school students in them. The largest numbers of potential
units and students are in the Garden Gate and Collins
elementary school attendance areas, in the Lawson
Middle School area, and in the Cupertino and Monta Vista
High School areas. Collins and Garden Gate Elementary
Schools and Cupertino High are, or will be, among the
schools with the greatest enrollment stress. The projected
student enrollment from new units is a small fraction of the
projected student enrollment from the existing units in the
City.
B-1 2 0 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
1 1 1
i
I k,.r"..
i,, y C"
By 2023
Number of Units Expected 1,140 1,140 1,060 1,993
CUSD Students Expected 365 365 339 638
FUHSD Students Expected 80 80 74 140
Total Students* 445 445 413 778
SCUSD enrollment impacts are relatively small,possibly either positive or negative.
Capital costs to add capacity related to rising enrollment
are significant, and development impact fees from
residential development only cover a quarter of this cost.
Table 4.11 indicates the estimated cost deficits related to
needed capital improvements associated with increases
in enrollment. This analysis does not include impact fee
revenue from non-residential development; as such, cost
deficits may be somewhat overstated.
i I
r .i e' f dh.- • •
3y
q ' «
o. .i S.X'.X...a..3-`3#.-``»,.a . f .. „a.rN'.
By 2023
CUSD Net Capital
Facilities Cost Deficit
8'76 8.76 8.13 15.31
FUHSD Net Capital
Facilities Cost Deficit
4.02 4.02 3.71 7.03
SCUSD receives large capital facilities and operating revenue benefits if development is significant.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 2 1
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
4.4. Opportunities for Energy Conservation
Maximizing energy efficiency and incorporating energy
conservation and green building features can contribute
to reduced housing costs for homeowners and renters.
In addition, these efforts promote sustainable community
design and reduced dependence on vehicles, and can
significantly contribute to reducing greenhouse gas
emissions. In addition to compliance with state regulations,
the Environmental Resources/Sustainability, Land Use,
and Circulation Elements of the Cupertino General Plan
includes policies related to energy conservation and
efficiency. In particular, the Land Use Element provides
for higher-density housing in proximity to employment
centers and transportation corridors and includes mixed
use development where appropriate. In addition, the City
is undertaking an effort to prepare a Climate Action Plan
CAP) by modifying the Regional Climate Action Plan to
suit the City's needs in order to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. The CAP will meet the regulatory requirements
of the California Global Warming Solutions Act, commonly
known as AB 32. The Plan will include community-vetted
measures to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
in the region and locally to foster a healthy and resilient
Cupertino. Through extensive research and community
input, the CAP will meet statewide emission mitigation
targets and identify opportunities to reduce emissions that
impact the local environment.
The City adopted a Green Building Ordinance in 2012.
The ordinance aligns with the California Green Building
Standards Code (CALGreen) which sets the threshold of
building codes at a higher level by requiring development
projects to incorporate green building practices. Cal Green
requires every new building built after January 1, 2011
to meet a certain baseline of efficiency and sustainability
standards. The ordinance aims to promote green practices
g_ 2 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
e.g., water, energy and resource conservation) through the
design, construction and maintenance of new buildings and
existing buildings undergoing major renovations. The City's
Green Building Ordinance applies to all new residential
and non-residential buildings and structures, additions,
renovations, and tenant improvements where CalGreen
and minimum green building measures are applicable.
For residential development the ordinance differentiates
between smaller projects of nine or less units and large
projects with more than nine units. The Ordinance requires
arger development projects to earn certification per the
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) or
Green Point Rating (GPR) standards. Smaller developments
must meet Cal Green's minimum thresholds as established
by the state.
Utility providers serving Cupertino also encourage energy
and water conservation. The Santa Clara Valley Water
District offers rebate programs that can help residents and
businesses save both water and energy. Examples include
rebates for high-efficiency toilets and clothes waters,
converting high-water using landscape to low water using
landscape, and connecting a clothes washer to a graywater
irrigation system. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E)
offers energy efficiency rebates to property owners and
managers of multifamily dwellings that contain two or
more units. The program encourages owners of existing
properties to upgrade to qualifying energy-efficient
products in individual tenant units and in the common areas
of residential apartment buildings, mobile home parks and
condominium complexes.
The Housing Element contains policies and strategies to
promote energy conservation. For example, the City will
evaluate the potential to provide incentives, such as waiving
or reducing fees, for energy conservation improvements
at affordable housing projects (including both existing
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSfNG ELEMENT B-1 2 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
and new developments that have fewer than ten units) to
exceed the minimum requirements of the California Green
Building Code.
4.5. Summary
Cupertino's General Plan and Zoning Ordinance are not
development constraints to new housing production. The
Land Use/Community Design Element of the General
Plan identifies four categories of residential use and
four mixed use categories, while the Zoning Ordinance
permits residential development in seven districts, plus
planned development districts.
The Zoning Ordinance allows rotating and permanent
homeless shelters in the BQ Zone in compliance with
State law.
The Zoning Ordinance permits employee housing for
workers and their families in residentially zoned districts.
Site improvement, building code requirements, and
permit processing time in Cupertino are comparable to
surrounding communities and are not a development
constraint.
Development fees in Cupertino are comparable to those
in neighboring jurisdictions.
The lack of state and local funding sources for affordable
housing and limited access to financing, in conjunction
with the high cost and low supply of land, may constrain
housing development in the near term.
A potential constraint to housing development is
road capacity. Residential projects may be required to
undertake mitigation measures if developments result in
traffic impacts.
B-1 2 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
The stormwater drainage, water distribution, and
water supply systems are adequate to accommodate
anticipated growth in Cupertino and are not considered
constraints to development. Wastewater treatment is
reaching capacity in the area; however, existing plants
have some excess capacity to treat new wastewater
flows associated with development pursuant to Housing
Element policy. Some sewer line capacity deficiencies
also exist in certain areas of Cupertino—the Cupertino
Sanitary District is in the process of assessing deficiencies
and developing capacity fees intended to fund necessary
improvements.
Capacity and fiscal impacts to the Cupertino Union
School District, Fremont Union High School District and
the Santa Clara Unified School District must be evaluated
on a case-by-case basis. State law provides that payment
of school impact fees fully mitigates impacts, and as
such, the City's ability to require additional mitigation is
limited by State law.
Community acceptance may serve as a constraint to
housing development. Over the past several years,
multi-family projects have been successfully opposed by
residents.
5. HOUSING RESOURCES
5.1. Overview of Available Sites for Housing
The purpose of the adequate sites analysis is to
demonstrate that the City of Cupertino has a sufficient
supply of land to accommodate its fair share of the region's
housing needs during the RHNA projections period
January 1, 2014 – October 31, 2022). The Government
Code requires that the Housing Element include an
inventory of land suitable for residential development,
including vacant sites and sites having the potential for
redevelopment" (Section 65583(a)(3)). It further requires
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-1 2 S
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
that the element analyze zoning and infrastructure on these
sites to ensure housing development is feasible during the
planning period.
Demonstrating an adequate land supply, however, is only
part of the task. The City must also show that this supply
is capable of accommodating housing demand from all
economic segments of the community. High land costs
in the Bay Area make it difficult to meet the demand for
affordable housing on sites that are zoned at relatively low
densities. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(c)
3)(B), local governments may utilize "default" density
standards (e.g. the "Mullen Densities") to provide evidence
that "appropriate zoning" is in place to accommodate
the development of housing for very-low and low-income
households . The purpose of this law is to provide a
numerical density standard for local governments, resulting
in greater certainty in the housing element review process.
Specifically, if a local government has adopted density
standards that comply with the criteria provided in the law,
no further analysis is required to establish the adequacy
of the density standard. The default density standard for
Cupertino and other suburban jurisdictions in Santa Clara
County to demonstrate adequate capacity for low and very
low income units is 20 dwelling units per acre or more.
5.2. Progress towards the Regional Housing
Needs Allocation (RHNA)
California General Plan law requires each city and county
to have land zoned to accommodate its fair share of the
regional housing need. Pursuant to California Government
Code Section 65584, the state, regional councils of
government (in this case, ABAG) and local governments
must collectively determine each locality's share of regional
housing need. The major goal of the RHNA is to ensure a
fair distribution of housing among cities and counties in the
B-1 2 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
State so that every community provides for a mix of housing
for all economic segments. The housing allocation targets
are not building requirements; rather, they are planning
goals for each community to accommodate through
appropriate planning policies and land use regulations.
Allocation targets are intended to ensure that adequate
sites and zoning are made available to address anticipated
housing demand during the planning period.
The RHNA for the ABAG region was adopted in July 2013.
This RHNA covers an 8.8-year projection period (January 1,
2014 through October 31, 2022)9 and is divided into four
income categories: very low, low, moderate, and above
moderate. As determined by ABAG, the City of Cupertino's
fair share allocation is 1,064 new housing units during
this planning cycle, with the units divided among the four
income categories as shown in Table 5.1. Since the RHNA
uses January 1, 2014 as the baseline for growth projections
for the 2014-2022 projection period, jurisdictions may
count toward the RHNA housing units developed, under
construction, or approved since January 1, 2014. Between
January 1 and May 31, 2014, building permits for 14 single-
family housing units and three second units were approved
in Cupertino. In addition, six single-family homes and seven
apartments received Planning approvals (Table 5.1).
Also included in the RHNA credits are 32 second units
also known as accessory dwelling units) projected to
be developed within the planning period. As provided
in Government Code Section 65583(c)(1), in addition to
identifying vacant or underutilized land resources, the City
can address a portion of the RHNA through an estimate of
the number of second units that may be permitted during
the planning period. The City approves an average of four
second units per year. Considering this track record, the
9 The Housing Element planning period differs from the RHNA projection
period—the period for which housing demand was calculated.The Housing
Element covers the planning period of January 31,2015 through January 31,
2023.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g-1 2 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
City estimates that 32 second units will be approved over
eight-year planning period. Cupertino's Zoning Ordinance
permits second dwelling units on lots in Single-Family
Residential (R-1), Residential Hillside (RHS), Agricultural (A),
and Agricultural Residential (A-1) Districts. Permit approval
and architectural review are done at the ministerial (building
permit) level.
Consistent with Government Code Section 65583(c)(1) and
HCD technical guidance documents, the City is applying
the second unit estimate towards its moderate income
RHNA. HCD has indicated that second unit affordability can
be determined by examining market rates for reasonably
comparable rental properties and applying these rates to
estimate the anticipated affordability of second units. A
review of rental market conditions in Cupertino conducted
for this Housing Element found that the average cost of a
studio apartment is $1,608 and the average cost of a one-
bedroom apartment is $2,237. These rental rates are in the
range of moderate income rents as determined by HUD
see Table 2.15: Maximum Affordable Housing Costs, Santa
Clara County, 2013). As these units are comparable in size
and occupancy to second units, it is reasonable to assume
that current rents for second units fall within affordability
levels for one-person moderate-income households.
Therefore, second units in the pipeline and the anticipated
32 second units are credited against the moderate income
RHNA. Furthermore, recent research in the San Francisco
Bay Area has found that a sizable fraction of secondary
units are rented to acquaintances, friends or family, in some
cases for free and in other cases, for reduced rents. This
research suggests that second units may in fact be a source
of affordable housing in the City at affordability levels
lower than the moderate-income level they are credited
against. Applying the projected 32 second units toward the
10 Chapple, Karen and Jake Wegmann. Understanding the Market for Secondary
Units in the East Bay.UC Berkeley: Institute of Urban and Regional Developmental.
Oct 2012.
g_ 2 g HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Techn cai Report
moderate income category is a conservative approach, and
is consistent with State law and HCD technical guidance
documents.
With these credits, the City has a remaining RHNA of 1,002
units: 356 extremely low/very low-income units, 207 low-
income units, 196 moderate-income units, and 243 above
moderate-income units.
4;
i'
1
Various Single-Family Units 14 14BuildingPermits)
Various Single-Family Units
Planning Permits) 6 6
Multi-Family Units (Planning
Permits)
Second Units Permitted
Building Permits) 3*3
Estimated Second Unit 32*32Production
Total 35 27 62
2014-2022 RHNA 356 207 231 270 1,064
RHNA Credits 35 27 62
Remaining 2014-2022 RHNA 356 207 196 243 1,002
Source:ABAG Regional Housing Needs Allocation, 2014;City of Cupertino, 2014
Notes:
These units do not have afFordability restrictions. Market rate rents and sale prices for similar units fall within levels affordable to the
households earning moderate incomes(81-120%AMI)and are allocated as such.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 2 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
5.3. Residential Capacity Analysis
Methodology
Like many cities in the Bay Area, Cupertino is largely
built out. As a result, opportunities for residential units
will be realized through the redevelopment of sites with
existing buildings. City staff undertook a deliberate
site selection process to ensure that future residential
development on the sites would: 1) have community
support (see description of community process below), 2)
achieve community goals of affordability and walkability,
and 3) create a livable environment for new residents and
neighbors. To ensure this, sites were selected based on
the following criteria:
Proximity to transportation corridors
Proximity (preferably within walking distance) to
amenities such as schools, neighborhood services,
restaurants and retail
Ability to provide smaller, more affordable units; sites
were selected in higher density areas to achieve this
Create a livable community with the least impact on
neighborhoods; sites that had the most in common with
successfully developed sites were selected
Corner lot location; such parcels provide the most
flexibility to accommodate mixed-use developments and
avoid impeding parking and connectivity between mid-
block parcels
In addition to the state-wide criteria that HCD uses to
determine site suitability, the Sustainable Communities
Strategy/One Bay Area Plan contributed additional criteria
regarding what makes a desirable housing site in the ABAG
B-1 3 0 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING EIEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
region. The One Bay Area Plan is a long-range integrated
transportation and land-use/housing strategy through
2040 for the San Francisco Bay Area. The plan focuses
development in Priority Development Areas (PDAs) which
are locally designated areas within existing communities
that have been identified and approved by local cities
or counties for future growth. These areas are typically
accessible to public transit, jobs, recreation, shopping and
other services, and absorb much of the growth anticipated
in the region. In Cupertino, a PDA is located along Stevens
Creek Boulevard between Highway 85 and the City of Santa
Clara and along De Anza Boulevard between Stevens Creek
Boulevard and Highway 280. Key criteria in the Sustainable
Communities Strategy/One Bay Area Plan include:
Location along major transportation routes with access
to transit or within '/z mile of a Valley Transit Authority-
designate PDA
Proximity to employment and activity centers
Proximity to amenities
With the selection criteria in mind, City staff conducted a
thorough study evaluating underutilized land in Cupertino.
These parcels included residentially zoned land as well as
other designations such as commercial and mixed use.
Community Involvement
To ensure that both community members and property
owners support of the Housing Element—and sites
inventory in particular—City staff engaged in an in-depth
community involvement process. The inventory of
residential opportunity sites was developed in consultation
with the Housing Commission, Planning Commission, City
Council, and members of the public. The Housing Element
and sites inventory were discussed at 12 workshops,
study sessions, and hearings in 2014. At each meeting,
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 3 1
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
commissioners and council members, as well as members
of the public, discussed the inventory. During these
discussions, several sites were removed and new sites were
added based on input from these various stakeholders.
Decisions to add or remove sites were based on realistic
expectations for sites to be redeveloped within the
planning period.
In addition to consultation with various community
stakeholders, City staff reached out to individual owners
whose properties were identified as housing opportunity
sites. Each affected owner received a letter informing them
that their property had been identified by the City to be
included in its Housing Element as a housing opportunity
site. The letter provided information about the process and
the opportunity to provide feedback or express concerns.
The sites with property owner development interest were
evaluated against the criteria described above. Sites that
did not meet the criteria were not included in the inventory.
Sites where the owner objected to inclusion were not
included in the final inventory.
While residential development may occur on other sites
not included in this inventory, the sites ultimately included
in this Housing Element are those the City believes have
the most realistic chance of redeveloping into housing
within the planning period. As a result of the community
engagement process, the sites inventory represents a list
of residential opportunity sites that the community has
thoroughly reviewed.
B-1 3 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Determination of Realistic Capacity
Sites inventory capacity must account for development
standards such as building height restrictions, minimum
setbacks, and maximum lot coverage, as well as the
potential for non-residential uses in mixed-use areas. A
survey of recent developments (Table 5.2) indicates
that recent multi-family residential projects have built to
between 82 percent and 99.5 percent of the maximum
allowable density. To ensure that the sites inventory
provides a "realistic capacity" for each site, estimates for
maximum developable units on each site are conservatively
reduced by 15 percent.
r',..
Site Area (acres) 5.9 3.24 1.6 1.0 3.3
Max. Density 35 25 35 25 35dwellingunitsperacre)
Max. Developable Units 205 81 56 25 116
Actual Units Developed 204 74 46 23 107
Actual/Max. Units 99.5% 91.3% 82% 92% 92%
Commercial Sq. Ft. as % 3%a 2%NA 8%4%of Total Sq. ft.
Source:City of Cupertino,2014
Because of the desirability and high value of residential
property in Cupertino, developers are reluctant to include
ground floor commercial space in residential buildings,
even when land is zoned for mixed-use development. The
City must often encourage or request that ground-floor
commercial space be included in projects and commercial
space typically represents a small proportion of the total
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 3 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
development. Staff anticipates that this trend will continue,
and land zoned for mixed-use will achieve residential
densities at or above 85 percent of the maximum with
ground floor commercial space along the street frontage.
This trend is evident in the three mixed-use project
examples that contained ground floor commercial
development. The Biltmore Adjacency, Metropolitan and
Adobe Terraces projects are typical mixed-use, multi-
family developments in Cupertino. In both cases, the
commercial component represented a small portion of
the total square footage (between 2 and 8 percent). Even
with the provision of ground floor commercial space, these
developments were able to achieve 91 to 92 percent of the
maximum allowable residential units. The height limit of
developments in most of the major transportation corridors
is 45 feet at the minimum. Based on the development
experiences at the completed projects described above,
the density assumptions for mixed-use residential projects
at 85 percent of the maximum allowed is realistic.
The assumption that sites will achieve 85 percent of
the maximum allowable density is also realistic for sites
that allow for a variety of uses, including 100 percent
commercial development, in addition to residential
development and mixed-use development. This is
because of the high market value of available properties
for residential development. As discussed above,
the desirability and high value of residential property
in Cupertino encourages residential or mixed-use
development over exclusively commercial development.
All five example projects presented above were developed
in a zone that allows a mix of uses including exclusively
commercial and office development, further demonstrating
the strength of residential development over commercial
development in Cupertino.
B-1 3 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housfng Element Technfcal Report
5.4.Residential Sites Inventory - Scenario A
Cupertino has residential development opportunities
with sufficient capacity to meet and exceed the identified
housing need (Figure B-7). The opportunities shown in the
sites inventory consist predominantly of underutilized sites
that can accommodate 1,400 residential units on properties
zoned for densities of 20 dwelling units to the acre or more.
The sites inventory is organized by geographic area and in
particular, by mixed use corridors. As shown, sites identified
to meet the near-term development potential lie within the
North Vallco Park Special Area, the Vallco Shopping District
Special Area, and the Heart of the City Special Area.
As indicated in a market study completed in 2014, there is
a healthy demand for new housing and long-term trends
indicate market potential for additional development in
key areas throughout the city. The 2014 market study
further found that existing demand is greatest for smaller,
more affordable units adjacent to services, retail, and
entertainment options. All sites in the Housing Element
to meet the RHNA are identified on major mixed-use
corridors, close to services and major employers.
As demonstrated previously, City leaders have a strong
record of supporting and facilitating the development of
residential projects in mixed-use areas and of intensifying
residential uses where appropriate within the context of the
general plan land use allocations. Regulatory standards,
including the revised Density Bonus Ordinance, are
intended to encourage additional residential development
on these sites. Altogether, the five sites ensure that
adequate sites beyond the remaining RHNA are provided
for in the planning period.
A parcel-specific listing of sites is included in Section 7.3:
Sites Inventory Table. Four of the sites in the Residential
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-1 3 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Sites inventory may be developed without a Conditional
Use Permit with the number of units identified in this
Housing Element.
The City has identified one key opportunity site that will
involve substantial coordination for redevelopment (Vallco
Shopping District, Site A2). Due to the magnitude of the
project, the City has established a contingency plan to
meet the RHNA if a Specific Plan is not adopted within
three years of Housing Element adoption. This contingency
plan, called Scenario B, is discussed later in this document
see Section 5.5 Residential Sites Inventory - Scenario B).
North Vallco Park Special Area
The North Vallco Park Special Area encompasses 240 acres
and is an important employment center for Cupertino and
the region. The area is located in the northeastern corner
of the City, bounded by Homestead Road to the north and
Interstate 280 to the south. The area is defined by Apple
Campus 2 and the North Vallco Gateway. The North Vallco
Gateway includes a medium to high-density multi-family
residential project east of Wolfe Road and two hotels and
the Cupertino Village Shopping Center west of Wolfe
Road. The North Vallco Park area is envisioned to become
a sustainable office and campus environment surrounded
by a mix of connected, high-quality and pedestrian-oriented
neighborhood center, hotel, and residential uses.
The Apple 2 Campus is expected to be a significant
catalyst for residential development in this vicinity. The area
accordingly presents a prime opportunity for redevelopment.
Site A1 (The Hamptons)
Site A1 is located at the southeast corner of the intersection
of Pruneridge Avenue and North Wolfe Road, adjacent
to the recently approved Apple Campus 2. The site is
comprised of two parcels totaling 12.44 acres and is currently
occupied with a 342-unit multi-family housing development
B-1 3 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Figure B-7
Prioirty Housing Element Sites - Scenario A
Applicable if Vallco Specific Plan is adopted by May 31,2018
If Vallco Specific Plan is not adopted by May 31,2018, the designated Priority Housing Element Sites will be as shown in General Plan
Appendix B,Section 5.5:Residential Sites Inventory-Scenario B.
North Vallco
Park:
e'' 600 Units
Sunnyvale
LosAltos I ,_.
a..i
t____. 1 -__...
f t...__..._-__
p•
tf t 6 ri w pw,.. ...
f _ 1 u d t eoo rts
Va COif
Shopping
z:v.o ? r District:
389 Units
Y\C""'-1f`
l e
t.. Santa Clara
I `1' M . .
M Ma.ina
i IA30 k i 200un tt
i_—.._ .f. I
i200unlls
I
5'V ant .,.t._-a
o C,, ;,
i ,
R4M
i
J
i
1
Heart of the
t - San Jose Clt/:
411 Units
i ii
g
Y t
l
y
t i .
1 I"Y Y
l 1 ' e_.._, ...___I
J t 4` /
d
Legend
k
City Boundary 4% Housing Elemen[s
Sites
O6-'--' Urban Service Area Boundary VTA Priority
Sphere of Influence DevelopmentArea
Boundary Agreement Line
PDA)
Site Number:Realistic
Unincor orated AreasP Capacity.Naa:a.,u.a
w i y i.q e.my esw o
0 0.5 1 Mile
patlryalbweE
T
0 1000 2000 3000 Feet
Special Areas
Heart of the City05001000Melers
O North Vallco Park
Vallco Shopping District
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g_ 3 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
and surface parking lots. The site's property owners have
expressed interest in redeveloping the site with significantly
higher residential densities than what exists today. Such a
redevelopment will create an opportunity to reduce vehicle
trips for employees living within walking and bicycling
distance to this regional employment hub. The property
owner has publically voiced interest in redevelopment of
the property to provide additional residential units, and has
issued a letter indicating this intent to the City.
The site has a land use designation of High Density (greater
than 35 du/ac), zoned Planned Development (P [Res]), and
allows for a maximum density of 85 units per acre. The City
has approved increased heights to facilitate development of
the Hamptons property at the densities identified.
Assuming realistic capacity of 85 percent of maximum
density is achieved, Site A1 has the potential to yield 600
net units, for a total of 942 units on site. The close proximity
to major transportation routes (freeway) and adjacency to a
major new employment center (Apple Campus 2), coupled
with the high demand for multi-family residential units in
Cupertino, make this site ideal for intensification.
k
i ey,r,
x :- ;"
c } `- = f
i '4 , S -
r.
r• 3r: y ` T "
l .
l,i ;' q
y
s4 `
i s -~!! N+ -`3 e}R L
1.:.
ry
fa kF.YY Y
S_ #c 4 T'* x Y ','
a
4.v
e''-.
r
i}a :f•'rr' t.s ',' *'3 .c • < .,'
j w; {: L,y t":.P'- y
a+ iri+°<t' 'i ` w,_
t, ri"a t:4T.y y'1 .;
y
S u r
1'
p e.(''£11'! 1., 'e. Y' Yb M y^'4 i1[.. f,- i
a. r'
z t
E A r: - --
x,; r
ti _
M -.,. 1y
Site A3: The Hamptons
B-1 3 8 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Vallco Shopping District Special Area
The Vallco Shopping District is centrally located in the
City. The property was originally developed as an indoor
mall in the 1970s for retail uses, anchored by Macy's,
Sears, JC Penny, and AMC Theaters. The property has
been remodeled several times since it was built. Despite
being the largest retail project in the City, the Mall is
largely vacant, save for the anchor tenants. According
to stakeholders interviewed for a retail strategy report
completed in 2014, Vallco represents not only one of the
best-located properties in the City, but also one of the City's
largest redevelopment opportunities.
Site A2 (Vallco Shopping District )
The Vallco Shopping District is physically divided by North
Wolfe Road, but connected via an elevated bridge. Up
until 2014, the approximately 58.7-acre site was divided
between five property owners on 14 parcels, representing
a combination of investors and anchor tenants. In 2014,
all parcels of the property were purchased by a single
developer who intends to pursue a Specific Plan and
redevelopment of the site.
The 2014 retail strategy report noted that there is an
oversupply of mall space in the United States, which is
affecting Vallco's performance. The Mall operates in a
competitive environment with successful projects to the
north (Stanford Shopping Center), east (Valley Fair and
Santana Row), and south (Westgate Shopping Center). In
addition, the nearby Main Street mixed-use development
will add an additional 125,000 square feet of retail,
further contributing to the market feasibility of alternate
residential) uses on this site.
To revitalize this area, the City envisions a complete
redevelopment of the existing Vallco Fashion Mall into a
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-1 3 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
E,`• f;`
b : :.
f i~ '
b 4,.
i` ` •• i
i... , 1
q =
d
t.'i ,T t"
e''' • "' `
6,
I: -
I U
4.`t~ i , Y, r s-.-
i` i 1 s
i. 1 .,` ,
y '
i:.. .
w.: "'
S-:.a :
M '.:, iv
Li'
r, i 'aQ
i' ., }, F,4
r,,4r ! L. ; ,,,1!•,
i 4rr yrc..,fr :
1 •
d
i 4i ',
e`t. '?'.i]
y tt? .
G; Fj_ _ d
j `
IM ,"" ..
1,
r
7-aF! Y
1 tlr f,
J i' r v - ..?
c--<
I"...
i`.
v- .1
i , r F4p.._ .. I
r
t . ~i
n ,'.-.
i r
i f i. . i i.; .
t a i i'
l
R
r
t _ .,,{ ,r,, • , . .
1 `'{ , _ .. " : 'IL F= t9,:.,t
Site A2: Vallco Shopping District
vibrant mixed-use "town center" that is a focal point for
regional visitors and the community. The site has a high
potential for redevelopment due to expressed property
owner interest to redevelop, high retail vacancy rates, close
proximity to major transportation routes (freeway), and the
potential to provide a considerable number of units at the
site. The high potential development capacity and close
proximity to two recently constructed mixed-use projects
Rosebowl and Main Street) further support redevelopment
of the Vallco Shopping District and the inclusion of this site
in the Housing Element.
The site is designated Regional Shopping/Office/Residential
B-1 40 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
in the General Plan and zoned Planned Development with
Regional Shopping and Commercial (P[Regional Shopping
and P[CG]). Strategy 1 provides that the City will adopt a
Specific Plan for the Vallco site by May 31, 2018 that would
permit 389 units by right at a minimum density of 20 units
per acre. The zoning for the site would be modified as part
of the Specific Plan process to allow residential uses as
part of a mixed-use development at a maximum density of
35 units per acre. If the Specific Plan is not adopted, the
City will schedule hearings consistent with Government
Code Section 65863 to consider removing Vallco Shopping
District as a Prioirty Housing Site and replacing it with the
sites shown in Scenario B.
Heart of the City Special Area
The Heart of the City Special Area is a key mixed-use,
commercial corridor in Cupertino. Development within this
Special Area is guided by the Heart of the City Specific
Plan, which is intended to create a greater sense of
place, community identity, and a positive and memorable
experience for residents, workers and visitors in Cupertino.
The area encompasses approximately 635 acres along
Stevens Creek Boulevard between Highway 85 and the
eastern city limit. The Stevens Creek Boulevard corridor
functions as Cupertino's main mixed-use, commercial and
retail corridor.
A majority of the Heart of the City Special Area is located
within a Priority Development Area (PDA). PDAs are the
result of a regional initiative that identifies areas where new
development will support the day-to-day needs of residents
and workers in a pedestrian-friendly environment served by
transit. PDAs are critical components for implementing the
region`s proposed long term growth strategy. The level of
growth in each PDA reflects its role in achieving regional
objectives and how it fits into locally designated priority
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g_ q
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
growth plans. Cupertino's PDA area, shown on Figure B-7,
includes properties within a quarter mile of Stevens Creek
Boulevard from Highway 85 to the City's eastern border and
a portion of North and South De Anza Boulevards.
To meet the RHNA, three sites encompassing over 15
acres have been identified within the Heart of the City
Special Area boundaries; these sites can accommodate 411
units at densities greater than 20 units per acre. Two sites
are underutilized infill properties, one site is vacant. For
underutilized parcels, the age of onsite buildings and the
parcels' improvement-to-land value (I/L) ratio suggest that
these sites are prime opportunities for redevelopment. In
addition, the redevelopment capacity of identified sites is
predicated on interest articulated by property owners and
recent development approvals in the area, including the
Metropolitan (107 units), Adobe Terrace (23 units), Main
Street (120 units), and Rose Bowl (204 units) mixed-use
projects.
Site A3 (The Oaks Shopping Center)
Site A3 is located on the north side of Stevens Creek
Blvd between Highway 85 and Mary Avenue in the Oaks
Gateway within the Heart of the City Special Area. The site
is comprised of four parcels (with two owner entities that
function under the same ownership) totaling 7.9 acres. The
site is occupied by the Oaks Shopping Center, which is
comprised of various small-scale commercial and restaurant
tenants. Although the Center is in relatively good condition,
it was originally constructed in 1976 as a single story
strucutre with ample surface parking, and has a resulting
low floor-area ratio. The I/L ratio for the consolidated
property is estimated at 0.31. The property owners are very
interested in redevelopment of the site with a mixed-use
residential and commercial) product, and have issued a
letter indicating this intent to the City. The zoning for this
B-1 4 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
property allows residential in addition to commercial uses.
The site presents a strong potential for a redevelopment
project that includes residential units based on its large
size, potential residential capacity, adjacent freeway access,
and location adjacent to residential development. A retai)
strategy report completed for Cupertino in 2014 identifies
the Oaks as a site well positioned for redevelopment,
perhaps as a retail-residential mixed-use project. Its location
on Stevens Creek Boulevard adjacent to Highway 85 and
in the Heart of the City District makes high-density multi-
family residential development feasible at this site. Several
relatively high-density mixed-use, residential projects are
s.;,":
J1,,
r:
i g-i:
b . ,7, - . ..
iV
µ
r
y
rSfs`T a.. d, .., f,
f'
r, .
n" !r+,`,.'. ,
f ,` ` •
l
a t
lq,,' ,.:}1\
i/
a
1i`' r t t.'
i i.
r:. , F'
r .+. .:. r
y14"t• yy 4 y.`
A.
z`
i Yi !'C . .
r
l. ' ,y:'..y
g{.i" N[J
Y
S j.i.--
Y
i, ,._I
e_ • !rY•_'YSeI sar Y 3.K
v-R ' "•
l tr
s .r y
a',.+
yi: '`y C,, *
r- .,f
p, :3:' r'' t +
1 F >1 ti ' k,a .s
i
j
iY.
A
r
k"'. /f F
1 i Ayi . ' 4 T,{ '
t a
a':i,l .
i;' ;,
S
T ; 3 µ'.rr . _ `
I« s.Ir ''
4
F .± `k'
y. `+
4 '
e t
l 'r`
1 C f
y r - Site A3: The Oaks
Shopping Center in close proximity on Stevens Creek Boulevard. Site
A3 is located within a Priority
Development Area.The site is designated for Commercial/Residential
in the General Plan, zoned Planned Development
with Generai HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g_
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Commercial and Residential (P[CG, Res]), and allows for
a maximum density of 30 units per acre. Site A3 has the
potential to yield 200 units.
Site A4 (Marina Plaza)
Site A4 is is located at the Bandley Drive/Alves Drive
intersection near the Stevens Creek Boulevard and North
De Anza Boulevard intersection, a major intersection in
the North Crossroads Node within the Heart of the City
Special Area. The site is comprised of one large (6.86-acre)
parcel and is occupied by a single-story commercial strip
mall and surface parking lot. The primary shopping center
tenant is an ethnic grocery store. The site is considered
underutilized given its prime location at a major intersection
and along one of the major corridors in Cupertino, in close
proximity to services and public transportation and adjacent
to existing residential neighborhoods. The (ocation and
configuration of the site allow for access from Stevens
Creek Boulevard, North De Anza Boulevard, Bandley Drive,
and Alves Drive. The property owner has expressed interest
in redeveloping the site to include residential uses. The
maximum density permitted on this site was increased in
2014 from 25 to 35 units per acre to facilitate this type of
redevelopment.
Site A4 is designated as Commercial/Office/Residential
C/O/R), zoned as Planned Development with General
i
r; x
A,,,
i;c=;
i-s't
1 ? .'*•
e
z ,
I "`` r,;'..
j.y
kiid, i 6` s r i °+ =E'
y .
b. .
s.d+`
r-.
r
I
t,r .. L" ..
1---..`_
i -
r
v
q
t,r-,-I
P R
T.
t. . . . -. - -
i'
LL
t: .-
Site A4: Marina Plaza
B-1 4 4 NCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Commercial and Residential (P[CG, Res]), and allows for
a maximum density of 35 units per acre. Site A4 has the
potential to yield 200 units.
Site A5 (Barry Swenson)
Site A5 is a vacant 0.55-acre property located along
the south side of Stevens Creek Boulevard, mid-block
between Finch Avenue and North Tantau Avenue. The
site is located across the street from the 17.4-acre Main
Street mixed-use project constructed in 2014. Main Street
is a high-intensity development expected to be major
community focal point. Although Site A5 is relatively small
compared to other sites included in the inventory, its
location on Stevens Creek Boulevard and in the Heart of
the City Special Area is conducive to relatively dense multi-
family residential development. Furthermore, high-density
multi-family development has been built on parcels of less
than one acre in Cupertino, including the 23-unit Adobe
Terrace project. The site is located along one of the major
transportation corridors in Cupertino, and in close proximity
to services and public transportation in the Heart of the City
Special Area.
r-;
J
Y , ti
j !
Y f
rr
qy Y•^t.. ' .
w.^+.,
f e
l
Y
1V"b_.'« : ,.
d'+'
k .;-`':
t ,... .'.y, Y . „''_ ' "
s.r" +k r
f
l"
r}w...,
f
h'T?
q :... :Y''5i. '
P' .. .Ti Yr A 6. .
wM.s h.:
µ.
y
R Y+vP :,+•p!?a ro «) a.w'er..t +
FL... .._ Site A5: Barry Swenson
Property HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 4
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
The owner of the property has expressed interest in
developing with residential uses, including affordable
products. Site A5 is located within a Priority Development
Area.
Site A5 was included in the 2007 Housing Element. The
site is designated in the General Plan for Commercial/
Office/Residential and is zoned Planned Development with
General Commercial and Residential uses (P[CG, Res]),
which allows for a maximum density of 25 units per acre.
Site A4 has the potential to yield 11 units.
Adequacy of Sites for RHNA - Scenario A
The sites inventory under Scenario Aidentifies capacity for
1,400 units, all of which are on sites suitable for development
Y
Site A1 (The Hamptons) High Density 85 12.44 600 Very Low/Low
P(Res)
Site A2 (Vallco Shopping RS/O/R 35 58.7 389 Very Low/Low
District) P(Regional Sho ping) &
P(CG)a
Site A3 (The Oaks C/R 30 7.9 200 Very Low/Low
Shopping Center) P(CG, Res)
Site A4 (Marina Plaza) C/O/R 35 6.86 200 Very Low/Low
P(CG, Res)
Site A5 (Barry Swenson) C/O/R 25 0.55 11 Very Low/Low
P(CG, Res)
Total 86.51 1,400
Notes:
a)Zoning to be determined by Specific Plan to allow residentiai uses.
b)Realistic capacity for Sites A1,A3,A4 and A5 reduces the maximum developable units by 15 percent. Realistic capacity for Site A2 is the
amount allocated to the site in the Housing Element;a specific plan will be required for Site A2 prior to any new development.
c) Identified capacity of sites that allow development densities of at least 20 units per acre are credited toward the lower-income RHNA based
on State law. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(c)(3)(B), local governments may utilize"default"density standards to provide
evidence that"appropriate zoning" is in place to suPport the development of housing for very-low and low-income households.The default
density standard for Cupertino and other suburban urisdictions in Santa Clara County is 20 dwelling units per acre(DUA)or more.
d)Residential capacity for Site A1 reflects the net increase in units.
Source:City of Cupertino,2014
B-1 4 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HUUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
1R M
ip,_. ry r
i i
r
i. ..:. ,.::,.. . 9:
Extremely Low and Very Low 1,400 356
Low 207
Moderate 196
Above Moderate 243
Total 1,400 1,002 398
Source:City of Cupertino,2014
of affordable housing at densities greater than 20 units per
acre. Overall, identified housing sites have the ability to
adequately accommodate the remaining RHNA of 1,002
units. Table 5.3 and 5.4 summarize the RHNA status.
5.5. Residential Sites Inventory - Scenario B
As noted above, one particular site identified in Scenario
A will involve substantial coordination for redevelopment
Vallco Shopping District, Site A2). Due to the magnitude
of the project, the City has established a contingency plan
to meet the RHNA if a Specific Plan is not adopted by
May 31, 2018. This contingency plan (referred to here as
Scenario B), involves the City removing Vallco Shopping
District, adding more priority sites to the inventory, and also
increasing the density/allowable units on other priority sites.
Four of the sites discussed in Scenario A above are also
included in Scenario B, with some modifications to density
and realistic capacity on two of these sites. Two additional
sites are added to the inventory, one of which was included
in the 2007-2014 Housing Element sites inventory.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B• 1 4 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Figure B-8
Prioirity Housing Element Sites - Scenario B
Applicable if Vallco Specific Plan is not adopted by May 31,2018
Homestead:North Vallco
132 Units Park:
B6:Homestead
750 Units
Sunnyvale ,,,e:
ti LosAltos i3a'i: _
1 ._, ....,.m ..__r1 r..,...... r __ t .
i` 1 j I e
9 ,:
H.m
t i a 1 souoin
P1...-
4.
1 F
v
85:Glenbrooks
58 units
Z.-.,
Santa Clara
1
i
i' ,1"s
1$
83.Mar ne j k
J BY.Oaks 300unas j
235uni1s J .
Ba:Va a nt i a.1i
1 ii J ''
r:;
1
i
1
t
1 7
i t`
w
t
w`' ,..,
v- .. .
e t
1__I
i r Heart of the
San Jose Clty:
i i i 504 Units
t
i
i
t
1 I
1 — „ —_—i1Iydr_ --- --
i. J
Legend
i Housing Elements
i City Boundary Sites
Urban$erviceArea Boundary VTAPriority
Sphere of Influence Development Area
Boundary Agreement Line
PDA)
s11e Site Number:Realistic
Unincor orated Areas c'
p Capacity.r+o.:a ar,
capacilyisgenerally 85%0(
0 0.5 1 Mile
m pM y
Special Areas/Neighborhoods
T
0 1000 2000 3000 Feet
Heart of the City
0 500 1000 Meters
North Vallco Park
Homestead
B-1 4 8 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Site B1 (The Hamptons Apartments)
Existing conditions, redevelopment potential, and
developer interest for the Hamptons Apartments are
discussed in detail under Scenario A (Site A1). For Scenario
B, if the Vallco Shopping District Specific Plan is not
adopted by May 31, 2018, the density for the Hamptons
would be increased to 99 units per acre and the associated
realistic capacity would result in a net increase of 750 units,
for a total of 1,092 units on that site.
Site B2 (The Oaks Shopping Center)
Information regarding redevelopment potential and existing
uses for the Oaks Shopping Center is provided in detail
under Scenario A (Site A3). For Scenario B, if the Vallco
Shopping District Specific Plan is not adopted by May 31,
2018, the realistic capacity for The Oaks Shopping Center
would be increased to 235 units. This would be associated
with an increase in density from 30 units per acre to 35
units per acre.
Site B3 (Marina Plaza)
Marina Plaza is discussed in detail under Scenario A (Site
A4). No changes are proposed to this site in Scenario B.
Site B4 (Barry Swenson Property)
The vacant property owned by Barry Swenson is discussed
in detail under Scenario A (Site A5). No changes are
proposed to this site in Scenario B.
Site B5 (Glenbrook APartments)
Site B5 contains the Glenbrook Apartments that are not
built to the maximum allowed density in the Heart of the
City Special Area. The apartment complex has large open
spaces that exceed open space requirements established
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 4 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
in the Zoning Code. As such, additional units could be
built on the site without removing existing uses. Spanning
31.3 acres, the site could accommodate 626 units under
existing zoning, which allows for a density of 20 dwelling
units to the acre. However, the Glenbrook Apartments
only contains 517 units, resulting in additional potential
for up to 109 residential units. Given the existing uses on
the site, realistic capacity was conservatively estimated at
46 percent. Assuming Glenbrook Apartments is able to
achieve 54 percent of the site's remaining capacity, the
realistic net yield for Site B5 is 58 new units. A similar type
of infill development that involves the expansion of garden
apartment complexes has previously been approved and
completed in Cupertino at the Markham (formerly known
as Villa Serra) and Biltmore developments. At the Biltmore,
carports were demolished and new units constructed above
ground-floor parking. New units and additional parking
were added to the Markham complex in surplus open
space and recreational areas. The Biltmore project added
29 units for a total project size of 179 units, while the Villa
Serra development added 117 units to achieve a total of
506 units. In both cases, existing units were not destroyed
to accommodate the expansion. Furthermore, in 2013 the
Biltmore added six units by demolishing existing carports
and has received entitlements to add seven more units
above a clubhouse serving the development in an existing
open space area in 2014.
Similar to the Biltmore Apartments, the Glenbrook
Apartments complex has large areas of land dedicated to
carports. As was done in the Biltmore development, the
carport areas can be converted to ground floor parking with
new units above. Additional units could be constructed
without affecting existing residential units at the site.
This site was recommended by members of the public and
the community supports the expansion of the Glenbrook
Apartments. The trend of adding new units to existing
garden apartment complexes is expected to continue in
B- 1 5 0 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Cupertino due to the limited supply of vacant land and the
high demand for residential units in the city. The financial
feasibility of additional units on Site A5 is particularly
strong because the property has long-time landowners
who purchased the land when prices were much lower. Site
B5 was included in the 2007 Housing Element.
The site is designated in the General Plan as Medium
Density (10 to 20 dwelling units per acre) and zoned Multi-
Family Residential (R3), allowing for a maximum density of
20 units per acre. Site B5 has the potential to yield 58 new
units.
A .
1'
C'' ti'.
ti . / x
f
N:
1'
ie«t v.1'+`.n 'i _ -i^,l'
T., ," y
1:1:5 _
iz• l
L 11Y
Li C }'y."K..
3 .
t
r'
w+a=`._ .... . , :.'
r
r.. l'- ."\..
r...
i-;v 6Y w /P
a. _
6
v.
v'f._Fi
d
7
1P-:._
a
y'
1 diwn'"1Na. 'e..:"',.'.., .: ..,
Y `
4. . . . .
Site B5: Glenbrook Apartments
Site Bb (Homestead Lanes)
Site B6 is located in the Stelling Gateway within the
Homestead Special Area and bounded by the Markham
Apartments to the east, additional apartments and
I-280 to the south, and the city boundary with the City
of Sunnyvale to the west. The Homestead Special Area
includes commercial uses and several low-, medium-,
and high-density residential neighborhoods. Site B6is
comprised of four parcels totaling 5.1 acres and is currently
occupied by a strip mall commercial center and surface
parking. The Homestead Bowl bowling alley is the primary
site tenant. Additional site tenants include small-scale
restaurants and a nail salon. The northwest corner of the
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B_1 S t
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
site is occupied by a McDonalds Restaurant. I/L ratios for
the parcels (ranging from 0 to 1.29) indicate that, except
for the McDonalds Restaurant, the land value far exceeds
the value of buildings on the site. Site Bb represents a
strong redevelopment opportunity as a mixed-use site
based on the I/L ratios, combined with the large size of the
site, deferred maintenance on the primary site, the close
proximity to a major transportation route (freeway), the low-
intensity and marginal nature of most of the current uses,
and its corner location.
The site is designated as Commercial/Residential (C/R),
zoned Planned Development with General Commercial and
Residential (P[CG, ResJ), and has a maximum permitted
density of 35 dwelling units per acre. Site B6 has the
potential to yield 132 units.
fi z -, r..i
Y F ,
i _
s
a-'
r, .. k R: y'.vQ' 5 'JF
ic. ' d t'`k,`i R",.p .`-:M,:
w
1^+
i—
9 f. _
H _ ..4V hl •"t W
v.
r a"_`..-' Z_'.
i s Y
a,.,i lw "
c z::. q 3 y, .,w
r j
s: u;
fi -
t;"``
i?', F-iy y.y ,pv
2' :
Site Bb: Homestead Lanes and Adjacency
B-1 5 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Adequacy of Sites for RHNA - Scenario B
The sites inventory under Scenario B identifies capacity for
1,386 units, all of which are on sites suitable for development
of affordable housing. Overall, identified housing sites have
the ability to adequately accommodate the remaining RHNA
of 1,002 units. Table 5.5 and 5.6 summarize the RHNA status
for Scenario B.
s
Site B1 (Hamptons) North Vallco Park High Density 99 a 12.44 750 Very Low/
P(Res) Low
Site B2 (The Oaks Heart of the City C/R 35 b 7.9 235 Very Low/
Shopping Center) P(CG, Res) Low
Site B3 (Marina Plaza) Heart of the City C/O/R 35 6.86 200 Very Low/
P(CG, Res) Low
Site B4 (Barry Heart of the City C/O/R 25 0.55 11 Very Low/
Swenson) P(CG, Res) Low
Site B5 (Glenbrook Heart of the City Medium Density 20 31.3 58 Very Low/
Apartments) R3(10-20) Low
Site B6 (Homestead Homestead C/R 35 5.1 132 Very Low/
Lanes and Adjacency) P(CG, Res) Low
Total 64.24 1,386
Notes:
a)A General Plan Amendement and zoning change will be ncessary to allow the increase in density from 85 to 99 units per acre on Site B1.
b)A General Plan Amendment and zoning change will be necessary to allow the increase in density from 30 to 35 units per acre on Site 62.
c)A General Plan Amendment and zoning change will be necessary to allow residential uses at 35 units per acre on Site B6. Existing zoning for
Site B6 is P(Rec,Enter).
d)Realistic capacity reduces the maximum developable units by 15 percent on Sites B1, B2,B3, B4,and 66. Realistic capacity of Site 65 is(d)
reduced by 46 percent due to existing site constraints.
e) Identified capacity of sites that allow development densities of at least 20 units per acre are credited toward the lower-income RHNA based
on State law. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2(c)(3)(B), local governments may utilize"default" density standards to provide
evidence that"appropriate zoning" is in place to support the development of housing for very-low and low-income households.The default
density standard for Cupertino and other suburban urisdictions in Santa Clara County is 20 dwelling units per acre(DUA)or more.
fl Realistic capacity for sites B1 and B5 represent net new units.
Source:City of Cupertino,2014
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 5 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
le
Extremely Low and Very Low 1,386 356
Low 207
Moderate 196
Above Moderate 243
Total 1,386 1,002 384
Source:City of Cupertino,2014
5.6. Environmental Constraints
The sites inventory analysis reflects land use designations
and densities established in the General Plan Land Use
and Community Design Element. Thus, any environmental
constraints that would lower the potential yield have already
been accounted for. Sites identified to meet the RHNA are
located in urbanized areas on previously developed sites;
as such, there are no wetlands or other important biological
issues of concern.
Any additional constraints that would occur on a more
detailed site review basis would be addressed as part of
the individual project review process. The capacity to meet
the regional share and individual income categories are not
constrained by any environmental conditions.
5.7. Availability of Site Infrastructure and
Services
Site development potential indicated in the sites inventory
is consistent with (and in most cases lower than) the
development capacity reported in the Land Use and
Community Design Element. Full urban-level services are
available throughout the city and specifically to each site in
the inventory. Such services are more than adequate for the
B-1 5 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEME(VT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technfcal Report
potential unit yield on each site. As indicated in the EIR for
the General Plan Amendment and the Housing Element,
there are sufficient water supplies available to serve the sites
identified to meet the RHNA. With regard to sewer capacity,
some capacity deficiencies exist in certain areas of Cupertino,
including sewer lines serving the City Center area and lines
on Stelling Road and Foothill Boulevard. As a result, the
Cupertino Sanitary District requires developers of substantial
projects to demonstrate that adequate capacity exists, or to
identify the necessary mitigations. Development within these
areas is reviewed on a case-by-case basis to ensure that
adequate sewer capacity exists.
5.8. Zoning for Emergency Shelters and
Transitional and Supportive Housing
To facilitate the development of emergency housing and
comply with State law, the City amended the Zoning Code
in 2010 to address emergency shelters and transitional and
supportive housing.
Emergency Shelters
An emergency shelter is a facility that provides temporary
housing with minimal supportive services and is limited to
occupancy of six months or less. State law requires Cupertino
to permit emergency shelters without discretionary approvals
in at least one zoning district in the City.
The BQ zone is suitable to include permanent emergency
shelters as a permitted use, and has historically allowed
for rotating emergency shelters. Other uses currently
permitted in the BQ zone with a conditional use permit
include religious, civic, and comparable organizations, public
utility companies, lodges, country clubs, child care facilities,
residential care facilities, congregate residences, hospitals,
and vocational and specialized schools.
As discussed in the Needs Assessment, the 2013 Santa
Clara County Homeless Survey identified 112 homeless
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 5 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
individuals on the streets and in emergency shelters,
transitional housing, and domestic violence shelters in the
city of Cupertino. The homeless facilities in Cupertino have a
capacity to house 20 individuals. As a result, there is a need
to accommodate at least 92 more homeless individuals in the
City.
There are several underutilized parcels within the BQ zone
that could accommodate a permanent emergency shelter
that serves 92 or more individuals. In particular, a number of
churches in BQ zones own more land than they currently use.
Surplus lands owned by churches include large parking lots
and recreational spaces like fields and tennis courts. There
are at least five parcels with approximately 154,000 square
feet of vacant land in the BQ zone that could accommodate
a permanent emergency shelter. These sites range from
19,000 square feet to 50,000 square feet, with an average lot
size of 31,000 square feet. Parcels of this size would be able
to accommodate a permanent emergency shelter that meets
the needs of Cupertino.
Those parcels with surplus land area in the BQ zone are
primarily located on or near Cupertino's main arterial
corridors, providing for easy access to public transportation
and essential services. In total, 12 bus lines and 131 bus
stops serve the City of Cupertino. Numerous bus lines run
along Stevens Creek Boulevard, providing connections to
many destinations throughout Silicon Valley. West Valley
Community Services, a nonprofit organization that provides
homeless services, is located within 1.5 miles of these
parcels. In addition, the Kaiser Santa Clara Medical Center
is located within 2.5 miles of the parcels. Many of the
City's retail and personal services are concentrated along
Cupertino's major corridors. As such, the underutilized BQ
parcels are appropriate locations for future emergency
shelters. Opportunities for the conversion of existing
buildings in the BQ zone into permanent emergency shelters
is more limited because there are currently no vacant
B-1 5 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
buildings in the zone. However, if vacancies arise within the
BQ zones, rehabilitation and reuse for emergency shelters
could be explored.
Emergency homeless shelters are designated as a permitted
use in the Quasi Public Building (BQ) zone. The ordinance
includes the following emergency shelter operational
regulations:
The number of occupants does not exceed 25
Adequate supervision is provided
Fire safety regulations are met
A management plan is provided which includes a
detailed operation plan
Shelter is available to any individual orhousehold
regardless of their ability to pay
Occupancy is limited to six months or less.
Housing Element Strategy 22 states that the City will
continue to facilitate housing opportunities for special needs
persons by allowing emergency shelters as a permitted use
in the "BQ" Quasi-Public zoning district.
In addition, rotating homeless shelters are also permitted
within existing church structures in the BQ zone under similar
conditions. The operation period of rotating shelters cannot
exceed two months in any one-year span at a single location.
Transitional and Supportive Housing
Transitional housing is defined as rental housing for stays of
at least six months but where the units are re-circulated to
another program recipient after a set period. Supportive
housing has no limit on the length of stay, and is linked
to onsite or offsite services. Senate Bill 2 clarified that
transitional housing and supportive housing constitute
residential uses. Zoning ordinances must treat transitional
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g. 5 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupertino
and supportive housing as a proposed residential use
and subject only to those restrictions that apply to other
residential uses of the same type in the same zone. In
Cupertino, transitional and supportive housing developments
are treated as residential land uses subject to the same
approval process and development standards as other
residential uses. The Zoning Code lists transitional
and supportive housing as a permitted use in all zones
allowing residential. These facilities are subject to the same
development standards and permit processing criteria
required for residential dwellings of the same type in the
same zones.
5.9. Financial Resources for Housing
The City of Cupertino has access to a variety of funding
sources for affordable housing activities. These include
programs from federal, state, local, and private resources.
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Program
Through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
program, the federal Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) provides funds to local governments
for funding a wide range of housing and community
development activities for low-income persons. During the
2013 fiscal year, the City of Cupertino received $342,702 in
CDBG funds. CDBG funds are used for public services, site
acquisition, housing rehabilitation, and fair housing/housing
counseling activities.
HOME Investment Partnership Program
HOME)
The City of Cupertino entered into a multi-city HOME
Consortium with the County of Santa Clara. As such,
developers of eligible affordable housing projects within the
City of Cupertino can competitively apply annually to the
County of Santa Clara for HOME Funds for City of Cupertino
affordable housing projects. The initial program year in which
g_ 5 g HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix 6
Housing Element Technical Report
HOME funds will become eligible to the City of Cupertino
will begin July 1, 2015. Eligible HOME activities may include,
but are not limited to acquisition, construction, rehabilitation
and tenant based rental assistance (TBRA).
Redevelopment Agency Set-Aside Funds
Redevelopment Agency (RDA) housing set-aside funds,
which used to be a primary local funding source for
affordable housing, are no longer available to assist in new
affordable housing development or acquisition/rehabilitation
of existing units for conversion into affordable housing. This
loss is associated with the Governor's 2011 state budget
revisions and subsequent court cases, and as a result,
funding sources for affordable housing are significantly
more constrained. Cupertino's Redevelopment Agency
dissolved as of February 1, 2012 according to state law. The
City elected to become a Successor to the Redevelopment
Agency (Successor Agency) in order to manage the wind-
down of remaining contracts and obligations of the former
Redevelopment Agency. The City does not have any
available housing bond funds remaining from this source nor
is it anticipated to receive program income in the future.
Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC)
Created by the 1986 Tax Reform Act, the LIHTC program
has been used in combination with City and other resources
to encourage the construction and rehabilitation of rental
housing for lower-income households. The program allows
investors an annual tax credit over a 10-year period, provided
that the housing meets the following minimum low-income
occupancy requirements: 20 percent of the units must be
affordable to households at 50 percent of AMI or 40 percent
of the units must be affordable to those at 60 percent of
AMI. The total credit over the 10-year period has a present
value equal to 70 percent of the qualified construction and
rehabilitation expenditure. The tax credit is typically sold to
large investors at a syndication value.
HCD REVIEVi/ED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 5 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) Program
The Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) Program was created
by the federal government, but the program is locally
administered by the County of Santa Clara to assist first-time
homebuyers in qualifying for a mortgage. The IRS allows
eligible homebuyers with an MCC to take 20 percent of
their annual mortgage interest as a dollar-for-dollar tax credit
against their federal personal income tax. This enables
first-time homebuyers to qualify for a larger mortgage than
otherwise possible, and thus can bring home ownership
within reach. In 1987, the County of Santa Clara established
an MCC Program that has since assisted over 200 low
and moderate-income first time homebuyers in Cupertino
to qualify for a mortgage. However, as housing prices
continue to rise in Cupertino, use of MCC has become less
feasible. During the last Housing Element period, the MCC
Program assisted three Cupertino low- and moderate-income
residents.
Housing Choice Voucher Program
The Housing Choice Voucher Program (formerly known
as Section 8 Rental Assistance) is a federal program that
provides rental assistance to very-low income persons in
need of affordable housing. This program offers a voucher
that pays the difference between the current fair market rent
and what a tenant can afford to pay (e.g. 30 percent of their
income). The voucher allows a tenant to choose housing
that may cost above the payment standard but the tenant
must pay the extra cost.
Housing Trust Silicon Valley
Housing Trust Silicon Valley provides loans and grants
to increase the supply of affordable housing, assist first-
time homebuyers, prevent homelessness and stabilize
neighborhoods. The Housing Trust's Affordable Housing
Growth Fund intakes funds from local jurisdictions and
provides matching grants for predevelopment activities,
acquisition, and construction and rehabilitation of multi-
family affordable housing developments. The City of
B-1 6 0 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Cupertino has contributed to the Fund through its former
Redevelopment Agency.
Below Market Rate (BMR) Affordable Housing
Fund (AHF)
The City of Cupertino has a Below Market Rate Affordable
Housing Fund that provides financial assistance to affordable
housing projects, programs and services. The City requires
payment of an Office and Industrial Mitigation fee, which
is assessed on developers of office and industrial space
and a Housing Mitigation fee, which is assessed on
developers of market-rate rental housing to mitigate the
need for affordable housing created by new development.
Developers of for-sale housing with six or fewer units are
required to pay the Housing Mitigation fee. Developers
of market-rate rental units, where the units cannot be
sold individually, must pay the Housing Mitigation fee to
the Affordable Housing Trust Fund to be consistent with
recent court decisions and the State Costa-Hawkins Act
regarding rent control. All affordable housing mitigation
fees are deposited into the City's Below Market-Rate (BMR)
Affordable Housing Fund (AHF). Recent funding activities
have included loans and grants to non-profit developers for
acquisition and rehabilitation activities and public services
such as landlord/tenant mediation services provided through
Project Sentinel, and assistance to very low income persons
and families provided through West Valley Community
Services. As of 2014, there is approximately $7 million in the
BMR Affordable Housing Fund.
General Fund Human Service Grants (HSG)
Program
Annually, the City of Cupertino provides approximately
40,000 to non-profit agencies providing needed services
to Cupertino residents. HSG Program funds are proposed to
be allocated on a competitive basis toward eligible public
service activities. Recent recipients have used the funds to
provide transitional housing for domestic violence victim,
senior adult day care services and legal assistance services to
seniors.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g_ 1 6 1
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
6. ANALYSIS OF CONSISTENCY WITH
GENERAL PLA I
The City's various General Plan components were reviewed
to evaluate their consistency with the policies and strategies
outlined in the Housing Element Update. The following
section summarizes the goals of each General Plan element
and identifies supporting Housing Element policies and
strategies. This analysis demonstrates that the policies and
strategies of this Housing Element provide consistency with
the policies set forth in the General Plan and its associated
elements. When amendments are made to the safety,
conservation, land use, or other elements of the City's
General Plan, the housing element will be reviewed for
internal consistency.
Section 6.1 . Land Use/Community Design
Goals
Create a cohesive, connected community with a
distinctive center and an identifFable edge
Ensure a compact community boundary that allows
efficient delivery of municipal services
Establish a high sense of identity and community
character
Maintain a thriving and balanced community
Promote thriving and diverse businesses that bring
economic vitality to the community, while balancing
housing, traffic and community character impacts
Protect hillsides and promote regional planning
coordination
Expand City-wide access to community facilities and
services
g. 6 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Hous ng Element Technical Report
Protect historically and archaeologically significant
structures, sites and artifacts
Promote a civic environment where the arts express an
innovative spirit, celebrate a rich cultural diversity and
inspire individual and community participation
Create a full range of park and recreational resources that
link the community, provide outdoor recreation, preserve
natural resources and support public health and safety
Supporting Housing Element Policies
Policies HE-2, HE-3, HE-4, HE-5, and HE-13
Supporting Housing Element Strategies
HE Strategies 1 and 26
Section 6.2. Circulation
Goals
Advocate for regional transportation planning decisions
that support and complement the needs of Cupertino
Increase the use of public transit, carpools, bicycling,
walking and telecommuting
Create a comprehensive network of pedestrian and
bicycle routes and facilities
Increased the use of public transit service and encourage
the development of new rapid transit service
Maintain roadway designs that accounts for the needs of
motorists, pedestrians, bicycles and adjacent land uses
Minimize adverse traffic and circulation impacts on
residential neighborhoods
Supporting Housing Element Policies
Policy HE-3 and HE-14
HCD REVIEWED DftAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 6 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupertino
Supporting Housing Element Strategies
HE Strategies 3 and 26
Section 6.3 Environmental Resources
Sustainability
Goals
Ensure a sustainable future for the City of Cupertino
Reduce the use of non-renewable energy resources
Improve energy conservation and building efficiency
Maintain healthy air quality levels for the citizens of
Cupertino through local planning efforts
Protect specific areas of natural vegetation and wildlife
habitation to support a sustainable environment
Ensure mineral resource areas minimize community
impacts and identify future uses
Ensure the protection and efficient use of water
resources
Improve the quality of storm water runoff
Reduce locally produced solid waste in order to reduce
energy, protect resources and meet or exceed state
requirements
Ensure adequate sewer capacity
Ensure adequate public infrastructure for existing uses
and planned growth
Supporting Housing Element Policies
Policies HE-10 and HE-14
Supporting Housing Element Strategies
HE Strategies 20, 21 and 26
g_ b q HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING EIEMENT
Appendix B
Hous ng Element Technical Report
Section 6.4 Health and Safety
Goals
Reduce hazard risks through regional coordination and
mitigation planning
Reduce risks associated with geologic and seismic
hazards
Protect the community from hazards associated with
wildland and urban fires through efficient and effective
fire and emergency services
Minimize the loss of life and property through
appropriate fire prevention measures
Create an all-weather emergency road system to serve
rura) areas
Ensure available water service in the hillside and canyon
areas
Ensure high quality police services that maintain the
community's low crime rate and ensure a high level of
public safety
Protection people and property from the risks
associated with hazardous materials and exposure to
electromagnetic fields
Ensure a high level of emergency preparedness to cope
with both natural or human-caused disasters
Protect people and property from risks associated with
floods
Maintain a compatible noise environment for existing and
future land uses
Reduce the noise impact from major streets and freeways
on Cupertino residents
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B • 1 6 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Protect residential areas as much as possible from
intrusive non-traffic noise
Design buildings to minimize noise
Supporting Housing Element Policies
N/A
Supporting Housing Element Strategies
N/A
7. SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS
7.1 Stakeholder Interviews
Stakeholder interviews were conducted on December 11
and 12, 2013 to solicit input from stakeholders ranging
from community members, property owners, housing
developers, service providers, School Districts and the
business community. The following agencies were invited
to participate (bolded agencies and persons participated,
totaling 25 people):
Advocates for a Better Cupertino
CARe (Cupertino Against Rezoning)
CCC (Concerned Citizens of Cupertino)
Cupertino Citizens for Fair Government (CCFG)
De Anza College
Silicon Valley Leadership Group
Cupertino Chamber of Commerce
Asian American Business Council
West Valley Community Services
League of Women Voters
HBANC (Bay Area Building Industry Association)
Housing Choices Coalition
Organization of Special Needs Families
B-1 bb HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOU5ING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Silicon Valley Association of Realtors
Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County
Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity
Live Oak Adult Day Services
Maitri
Senior Adults Legal Assistance (SALA)
Rotary Club
Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley
Senior Housing Solutions
Charities Housing
YWCA Silicon Valley-Support Network Department
United Way Silicon Valley
Outreach and Escort
Santa Clara Family Health Foundation
Support Network for Battered Women
Institute for Age-Friendly Housing
Senior Citizens Commission
Santa Clara County Council of Churches
Mid Pen Housing
Habitat For Humanity East Bay/Silicon Valley
Chinese American Realtors Association
Fremont Union High School District
Cupertino-Fremont Council of PTA
Cupertino Union School District
Modena Investments LP, Sunnyvale Holding LLC
Altos Enterprises Inc., Alpha Investments & Property
Management Co.
LPMD Architects
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g_ 6 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
UnafFiliated builders, (enders, and property owners
A summary of common themes from the interviews is
summarized below. All comments and ideas are reported
in aggregate and not attributed to any individual or
organization.
Housing Needs:
Overall housing affordability and the difference
between housing demand and supply at all income
levels
Need for diversity of affordable rental units at all
income levels and all household types
Need to accommodate a growing aging population
Smaller units including innovative housing models
e.g. dorms/boarding houses, senior care homes,
efficiency studios, shared & co-housing, micro units)
Community acceptance:
Acceptance is low due to impacts on schools, privacy,
parking, noise and traffic
Support for mixed use development in the style of
Santana Row and Downtown Mountain View
Improved local governmental transparency and
community development
Type of development:
Developers and advocates felt that three to five
story development is appropriate for adding units
but community representatives are concerned about
increased height of multi-family development
B-1 6 8 HCD REVIEWED DRAF7 HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Barriers to development of affordable housing include:
Financial constraints, particularly due to the
dissolution of Redevelopment Agencies and
elimination of many federal and state funding sources
and
Lack of community and political support for housing
Community and Business Groups:
Housing is a "choke point" in regional economy since
it is hard to attract and retain employees in a highly
competitive housing market
Several interviewees felt that private employers
should be obligated to provide more resources to
housing
Many felt that while employers feel concerned about
schools and housing, they generally work to limit fees
and taxes to businesses
School Districts:
Schools in the northern part of the City are impacted
due to higher student generation rates in existing
housing while capacity in the south of the city is
declining, likely due to aging households.
Capacity, where needed, is being expanded by
adding new buildings or, preferably, temporary and
modular units.
Currently using programs, centers and busing to
distribute students
Reluctant to re-district since homeowners purchase
homes based on the school service areas
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g_ q
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Most of the Apple Campus 2 school impact fees will
be allocated to the Santa Clara Unified School District
while they expect that most employees who move to
the area will reside within the CUSD service
7.2. Review of Previous Housing Element
A thorough review of the City's housing plan constitutes
an important first step in updating the Cupertino Housing
Element. This section provides an evaluation of the City's
progress towards achieving housing goals and objectives
as set forth in the prior Housing Element, and analyzes
the efficacy and appropriateness of the City's housing
policies and programs. This review forms a key basis for
restructuring the City's housing plan to meet the housing
needs of the Cupertino community. Table 7.1 provides a
detailed summary of the City's progress in implementing the
programs outlined in the 2007-2014 Housing Element and
Table 7.2 summarizes the City's progress toward its RHNA.
s • - a1 • •e`y • ' • . •.c!t a -1
r=. — - ----- - — x 1
Policy 1: Sufficiently Residentially Zoned Land for New Construction Need
Program 1: Zoning and Land Use The City completed the rezoning of 7.98 This program is proposed to be included
Designations acres of land from 10 du/ac to 25 du/ac in and revised in the 2014-2022 Housing
Rezone one property (APN: 326-10-046) 2010. The City is currently updating the Element to reflect the need to maintain
of 7.98 acres from 10 units per acre to 25 Land Use Element concurrent with the an inventory of sites to accommodate the
units per acre to accommodate up to 199 Housing Element update. The Land Use new RHNA of 1,064 units.
units.
Element update will likely result in addi-
tional sites for residential and mixed use
development to accommodate the fifth
cycle RHNA of 1,064 units.
Program 2: Second Dwelling Unit Between 2007 and 2013, 31 second units This program continues to be appropriate
Ordinance were constructed in the City. for the City and is proposed to be includ-
Continue to implement ordinance to
ed in the 2014-2022 Housing Element.
achieve 25 second units
Program 3: Encourage Lot Consolidation The City continues to provide assistance This is an ongoing activity and is pro-
Continue to encourage lot consolidation to property owners regarding lot consoli- posed to be included and revised in the
through master plans. Provide technical
dation. 2014-2022 Housing Element.
assistance to property owners.
g_ 7 p HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Hous ng Element Technical Report
11 1
1 1 • • Q ' : • - - ' • • .s i
a • a • •, -1 • •
s • - • • - • •
Policy 2: Housing Mitigation Plan
Program 4: Housing Mitigation Plan—Between 2007 and 2013, $1,195,414 This program represents a key financ-
Office and Industrial Mitigation had been collected through the Housing ing mechanism for affordable housing in
Continue to implement Office and Mitigation Program (Office/Industrial and Cupertino and is proposed to be included
Industrial Mitigation fee program. Residential) and deposited to the Below and revised in the 2014-2022 Housing
Market-Rate (BMR)Affordable Housing Element.
Fund (AHF).
Program 5: Housing Mitigation Program— Between 2007 and 2013, 20 Below This program represents a key mechanism
Residential Mitigation Market Rate (BMR) units were cre- for affordable housing in Cupertino and
Continue to implement the "Housing ated through the Residential Housing is proposed to be included and revised in
Mitigation" program to mitigate the need Mitigation Program: the 2014-2022 Housing Element.
for affordable housing created by new ' 17 BMR rental units (Markham)
market-rate residential development.3 BMR ownership units (Las Palmas)
The City contracts with West Valley
Community Services (WVCS)to admin-
ister the Below Market-Rate (BMR)
Affordable Housing Program which
includes placing eligible households in the
City's BMR units.
Between 2007 and 2013, $1,195,414
had been colleded through the Housing
Mitigation Program (Office/Industrial and
Residential) and deposited to the City's
Below Market-Rate (BMR)Affordable
Housing Fund (AHF).
Program 6:Affordable Housing Fund Between 2007 and 2013, $1,195,414 The City will continue to utilize the Below
Provide financial assistance to affordable had been collected through the Housing Market-Rate (BMR)Affordable Housing
housing developments. Expend housing
Mitigation Program (Office/Industrial and Fund (AHF)to support affordable hous-
funds in the following manner:Residential) and deposited to the City's ing projects, programs and services. This
Below Market-Rate (BMR) Affordable program is proposed to be included
Finance affordable housing projects. Housing Fund (AHF). These funds were and revised in the 2014-2022 Housing
Establish a down payment assistance used to support affordable housing proj- Element with a revised expanded list of
plan that may be used in conjunction ects, programs and services such as:potential eligible uses of funds.
with the BMR program or to make • Project Sentinel— LandlordlTenant
market rate units more affordable. Mediation Services
Establish a rental subsidy program • West Valley Community Services
to make market rate units more CS)— BMR Program
affordable. Administration
19935 Price Avenue—Acquisition of
affordable housing residential rental
property.
However,the City did not establish a
downpayment assistance program or a
rental subsidy program.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B • 1 7 1
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupertino
11 1
1 1 1 • • 1
9.., . ._.
s r - • • •
Policy 3: Range of Housing Types
Program 7: Mortgage Credit Certificate The County of Santa Clara continues to This program is proposed to be inciuded
MCC) Program operate this program. However, given the in the 2014-2022 Housing Element as
Participate in the countywide MCC pro-
high home prices in Cupertino, the poten- a new program— Referral to Housing
gram to assist one to two households tial of utilizing this program is limited. Resources.
annually.
As of 2013,the maximum purchase price
limits were $570,000 for resale properties
and$630,000 for new units.
Program 8: Move-In for Less Program This program offered by the Tri-County This program is proposed to be removed
Apartment Association was discontinued in from the 2014-2022 Housing Element.
Program is offered by the Apartments 2010.
Association.
Program 9: Surplus Property for Housing As part of the 2014-2022 Housing This program is proposed to be included
Explore opportunities on surplus proper-
Element update and concurrent Land Use and revised in the 2015-2023 Housing
ties as follows: Element update, the City has explored Element.
and prioritized various vacant and under-
In conjunction with local public utilized properties with potential residen-
agencies, schooi districts and tial and mixed use development within
churches, develop a list of surplus the next eight years. These properties
property or underutilized property are included in the sites inventory for the
that have the potential for residential Housing Element
development.
Encourage long-term land leases
of property from churches, school
districts corporations for construction
of affordable units.
Evaluate the feasibility of developing
special housing for teachers or other
employee groups on the surplus
properties.
Review housing programs in
neighboring school districts that
assist teachers for applicability in
Cupertino
Program 10:Jobs/Housing Balance The City's General Plan and 2007-2014 This program is proposed to be included
Program Housing Element offer adequate capac- and revised in the 2014-2022 Housing
Require major new office/industrial devel- ty to accommodate the City's RHNA for Element as key elements of three new
opment to build housing as part of new the planning period. The City continues programs— Land Use Policy and Zoning
development projects. to implement its Housing Mitigation Provisions, Housing Mitigation Plan —
Program to enhance the jobs/housing bal- Office and Industrial Mitigation and
ance in the community.Housing Mitigation Plan — Residential
Mitigation.
g_ 7 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSWG ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
1 1 1
m ,
6
yi,..
Y Y p. !1.• ' '
I
II
Policy 4: Housing Rehabilitation
Program 11: Affordable Housing The City continues to provide informa- This program is proposed to be included
Information and Support tion, resources, and support to develop- in the 2014-2022 Housing Element.
Provide information, resources and sup- ers.
port to developers who can produce
affordable housing
Policy 5: Development of Affordable Housing
Program 12: Density Bonus Program As part of the 2015-2023 Housing This program is proposed to be included
Allow for a density bonus and additional Element update,the City is also amend- and revised in the 2015-2023 Housing
concessions for development of 6 or ing its Zoning Code to revise the Density Element. A new revised Density Bonus
more units that provide affordable hous-
Bonus Ordinance to be consistent with Ordinance was adopted in 2014.
ing for families and seniors
State law.
Program 13: Regulatory Incentives for The City continues to waive park dedica- This program is proposed to be included
Affordable Housing tion fees and provide parking ordinance in the 2014-2022 Housing Element.
Provide regulatory incentives for afford- Waivers for affordable developments.
able housing, such as waiving park
dedication fees and construction tax for
affordable units, or reducing parking
requirement for mixed use developments.
Program 14: Extremely Low Income The City continues to support the This program is proposed to be included
Housing development of housing affordable to and revised in the 2014-2022 Housing
Encourage the development of adequate extremely low income households. Element. The proposed revision will
housing to meet the needs of extremely include Housing for Persons with Special
low-income households by providing Needs to be added to this program.
assistance and funding for affordable
housing developments
Program 15: Residential and Mixed Use As part of the 2015-2023 Housing This program is proposed to be added
Opportunities in or Near Employment Element update and concurrent Land Use as a policy statement to Goal A: An
Centers Element update, the City has explored Adequate Supply of Residential Units for
Encourage mixed use development and and prioritized various vacant and under- All Economic Segments for the 2014-2022
the use of shared parking facilities in or utilized properties with potential residen- Housing Element to encourage mixed
near employment centers. Evaluate the tial and mixed use development within use development.
possibility of allowing residential develop- the next eight years. These properties
ment above existing parking areas. are included in the sites inventory for the
Housing Element.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g- 7 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
i 1
1 '°1 ' +• - ' •. •:,..,. -. .- ..1 , „:+,i':7^fa' :W. _ • _+ ' _ ,.,a. .. y -.', .i
w . • • • i,n,. It 'tl
Program 16: Expedited Permit Procedures The City continues of offer expedited This program is proposed to be included
Expedite permit processing for housing Permit processing for affordable housing but revised in the 2014-2022 Housing
developments that contain at least 20 projects meeting the State Density Bonus Element as a new program - Incentives
percent of units for lower-income house-
requirements. for Affordable Housing Development
holds, or 10 percent of units for very low-
income households, or 50 percent of units
for senior citizens.
Poficy b: Tax Increment Funds
Program 17: Redevelopment Housing Set The Redevelopment Agency was dissolved Program is proposed to be removed from
Aside Fund in 2012, pursuant to AB1X26 and AB1X27. the 2014-2022 Housing Element.
Develop policies and objectives for the
use of those Low and Moderate Income
Housing Funds.
Policy 7: Housing Densities
Program 18: Flexible Residential The City continues to offer flexible devel- Policy 7 and this program are proposed
Standards opment standards. to be included in the 2014-2022 Housing
Allow flexible residential development
Element under Goal A to facilitate a
standards in planned residential zon- range of housing options in the commu-
ing districts, such as smaller lot sizes, nity.
lot widths, floor area ratios and set-
backs, particularly for higher density and
attached housing developments.
Program 19: Residential Development The City continues to provide this regu- This program is proposed to be included
Exceeding Maximums latory incentive to facilitate affordable and revised in the 2014-2022 Housing
Allow residential developments to exceed housing for persons with special needs. Element as part of a new program—
planned density maximums if they pro-
However, no development utilized this Housing for Extremely Low Income
vide special needs housing
incentive between 2007 and 2013. Households and Persons with Special
Needs
Program 20: Monitor R-3 Development The City continues to monitor its devel- This program is proposed to be included
Standards opment standards. Future residential in the 2014-2022 Housing Element as part
Monitor the R-3 development standards development is likely to focus in mixed of a new program— Land Use Policy and
on a regular basis to ensure that the use areas in the City. As part of the Land Zoning Provisions.
requirements do not constrain new hous- Use Element update process conducted
ing production. concurrent with the Housing Element
update,the City reviewed and proposed
modifications to development standards
to facilitate multi-family and mixed use
development.
Program 21: Clarify Language of Planned The Zoning Ordinance was amended in This program was completed in 2010
Development (P) District 2010 to clarify that residential develop- and is proposed to be removed from the
Amend the zoning ordinance to clarify
ment in the P (Res/R3) zones require a 2014-2022 Housing Element.
that residential development in P (Res/R3) planned development permit.
zones will require a planned development
permit and not a conditional use permit.
B-1 7 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
1
a*..
i r 1 • •
Policy 8: Maintenance and Repair
Program 22: Apartment Acquisition and The City continues to assist non-profits Preserving and improving the quality of
Rehabilitation with the acquisition and rehabilitation of housing for lower income households is
Provide financial assistance to eligible affordable housing units such as: important to the City. This program is
very low and low-income homeowners to • Maitri Transitional Housing proposed to be included and revised in
rehabilitate their housing units. Rehabilitation: CDBG funds were the 2014-2022 Housing Element to incor-
used to rehabilitate this four-unit porate both rehabilitation efforts for both
transitional housing for victims of single-family and multi-family rehabilita-
domestic violence. Project was
tion.
completed in 2010.
Senior Housing Solutions— 19935
Price Avenue:Acquisition and
rehabilitation of this property using
the Below Market-Rate(BMR)
Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) and
Community Development Block Grant
CDBG)funds and was completed in
2011. This home is now occupied by
five low income seniors.
Policy 9: Conservation of Housing Stock
Program 23: Preservation of "At Risk The City did not experience a loss of any The City works to preserve its affordable
Units" at risk" affordable units converting to housing stock. This program is proposed
Monitor owners of at-risk projects on an market-rate during the planning period to be included and revised in the 2014-
ongoing basis to determine their inter- 2022 Housing Element.
est in selling, prepaying,terminating or
continuing participation in a subsidy pro-
gram. Work with owners, tenants, and
nonprofit organizations to assist in the
nonprofit acquisition of at-risk projects to
ensure long-term affordability of develop-
ments where appropriate.
Program 24: Condominium Conversions The City continues to implement the This program is proposed to be included
Continue to implement to Condominium
Condominium Conversion Ordinance.and revised in the 2014-2022 Housing
Conversion Ordinance.
Element.
HCD REVIEWED DR FT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 7 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupe tino
11 1
i i • • s .
1
a • • • i • •
Program 25: Rental Housing Preservation The City has explored the extent to The City wil) continue to explore the
Program which the proposed Rental Housing extent to which existing rental housing
Develop and adopt a program that would
Preservation Program is consistent with can be preserved consistent with State
grant approval only if at least two of the State laws such as the Ellis Act and the law as part of the 2014-2022 Housing
following three circumstances exist: Costa Hawkins Act. Element.
The project will comply with the City's
BMR Program based on the actual
number of new units constructed, not
the net number of units; and/or
The number of rental units to be
provided on the site is at least equal
to the number of existing rental units;
and/or
No less than 20 percent of the units
will comply with the City's BMR
Program.
Program 26: Conservation and The City contracts with Rebuilding The City recognizes the importance of
Maintenance of Affordable Housing Together Silicon Valley(RTSV)to provide maintaining and improving its existing
Develop a program to encourage the
home safety repairs and mobility/acces- housing stock. This program is proposed
sibility improvements to income-qualified to be included in the 2014-2022 Housing
maintenance and rehabilitation of residen- owner-occupants using CDBG funds. The Element as a new program - Residential
tial structures to preserve the older, more focus of this program is on the correc- Rehabilitation.
affordable housing stock. tion of safety hazards. Between 2007
and 2013, 31 households were assisted
through this program.
Program 27: Neighborhood and The Environmental Services division orga- This is an ongoing program and is pro-
Community Clean Up Campaigns nizes an annual city-wide garage sale to posed to be included in the 2014-2022
Continue to encourage and sponsor encourage reuse of items which ordinarily Housing Element.
neighborhood and community clean up might end up in the landfill. Also,the divi-
campaigns for both public and private sion organizes community creek clean-up
properties.
campaigns.
Policy 10: Energy Conservation
Program 28: Energy Conservation The City continues to enforce Title 24. This is a function of the Building Division
Opportunities and is proposed to be included as a sepa-
Continue to enforce Title 24 requirements rate housing program in the 2014-2022
for energy conservation and evaluate
Housing Element.
utilizing suggestions as identified in the
Environmental Resources/Sustainability
element.
g_ 7 6 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Hous+ng Element Technical Report
1 1
1 1 1 • • i 1 s • s • .1
e • r• 1 • • -
Program 29: Fee Waivers or Reduction for The City adopted a Green Building This program is proposed to be included
Energy Conservation Ordinance in 2013 to facilitate energy and revised in the 2014-2022 Housing
Evaluate and implement the potential to conservation efforts. Residential and Element.
provide incentives, such as waiving or nonresidential new construction, addition,
reducing fees, for energy conservation and renovation are required to comply
improvements to residential units (exist- With the Green Building Ordinance.
ing or new).
Program 30: Energy Efficiency Audits Energy audits were offered through an The ARRA program expired in 2012. This
Offer free energy efficiency audits for '°`RRA grant by the Public Information program is proposed to be removed from
residential units under a contract with
Office through a contract with Actera. the 2014-2022 Housing Element.
Acterra.
Program 31: Energy Conservation in The City also adopted a Green Building This program is proposed to be included
Residentiai Development Ordinance in 2012 to encourage energy in the 2014-2022 Housing Element.
Continue to encourage energy efficient
conservation efforts.
residential development and provide tech-
nical assistance to developers who are
interested in incorporating energy efFicient
design elements into their program.
s
Policy 11: Special Needs Households
Program 32: Emergency Shelters The City revised the Zoning Ordinance in The City updated the Zoning Ordinance
Revise the Zoning Ordinance to allow 2010 to permit emergency shelters in the in 2014 to remove the requirement that
permanent emergency shelter facilities in BQ Quasi-Public zoning districts as a emergency shelters be located in church-
BQ" Quasi-Public zoning districts as a
permitted use. es. A program is proposed to be included
permitted use. in the 2014-2022 Housing Element to
continue to facilitate this type of housing.
Program 33: Rotating Homeless Shelter West Valley Community Services (WVCS) The City recognizes the critical need to
successfully managed the Rotating provide homeless prevention and emer-
Continue to support the rotating emer- Shelter Program for 18 years. The gency shelter services for the homeless
gency shelter operated by West Valley Rotating Shelter Program is now operat- in the region. This program is proposed
Community Services ed through Faith in Action Silicon Valley. to be included in the 2014-2022 Housing
Element.
Program 34:Transitional and Supportive The City revised the Zoning Ordinance in The Zoning Ordinance amendment pro-
Housing 2010 to provide transition and supportive gram was completed in 2010. This pro-
Amend its zoning ordinance to com- housing as a residential use to be permit- gram is proposed to be removed from
Ply with the requirements of SB2. ted in similar manners as similar uses in the 2014-2022 Housing Element.
Transitional and supportive housing will the same zones.
be treated as residential uses and be sub-
ject to the same development standards In 2008, the City contributed $800,000 to
and restrictions that apply to similar hous- Maitri, a non-profit agency providing tran-
ing types in the same zone. sitional housing to victims of domestic
violence, for the purchase of a four-plex
in Cupertino. The project was completed
in 2010.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g_ ' 7 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupert no
1 /
t 1 1 s s - 1 1 1 • e • i
r - • • • 1 • • a
Program 35: Catholic Social Services Catholic Charities continues to provide The City will continue to provide a range
Single Parents) the shared housing services through the of supportive services to its residents,
Provide help, Catholic Social Services,to Urban County CDBG program. especially those with special needs, in
place single parents in shared housing
order to foster a suitable living environ-
situations through the Santa Clara County
ment. A new program is proposed to be
Urban County programs.
included and revised in the 2014-2022
Housing Element to reflect the range of
services that may be supported by the
City.
Program 36: Flexible Parking Standards The City continues to offer reductions in This program is proposed to be included
Consider granting reductions in off-street
Parking requirements on a case-by-case in the 2014-2022 Housing Element.
parking on a case-by-case basis for senior basis for senior housing. However, no
housing.
new senior housing project was devel-
oped between 2007 and 2013.
Policy 12: Housing Discrimination
Program 37: Santa Clara County Fair The City continues to participate in the This program is proposed to be included
Housing Consortium Fair Housing Consortium. Fair housing and revised in the 2014-2022 Housing
Distribute fair housing materials at all materials distributed by various organiza- Element
public facilities throughout the City and tions are available at public counters.
also has a booth at public events to dis-
tribute materials.
Program 38: Fair Housing Outreach The City continues to contract with This program is proposed to be included
Continue to contract with ECHO Housing
Eden Council for Hope and Opportunity in the 2014-2022 Housing Element as a
to provide fair housing outreach services.
ECHO)to provide fair housing services, new program - Fair Housing Services.
including outreach and education, coun-
seling, and investigation of fair housing
complaints. Also Project Sentinel pro-
vides tenant/landlord mediation services
under contract for the City.
Program 39: Reasonable Accommodation The City adopted the Reasonable This program was completed in 2010
Ordinance Accommodation Ordinance in 2010 and is proposed to be removed from the
Adopt a written reasonable accommoda- 2014-2022 Housing Element.
tion ordinance to provide persons with
disabilities exceptions in zoning and land-
use for housing.
r. .. i
Policy 13: Coordination with Local School Districts
Program 40: Coordination with Local City staff continues to meet with the The City recognizes the importance of
School Districts school districts to discuss facility needs. addressing development impacts on the
Form a new committee of key staff from However, no formal committee was school districts. This program is pro-
the City and the school districts to meet
established. posed to be included and revised in the
on a bi-monthly basis or as needed to 2014-2022 Housing Element. In addition,
review City planning initiatives, develop-
the proposed new revised program will
ment proposals and School capital facili-
reflect coordination with other agencies,
ties and operating plans.
organizations, and neighboring jurisdic-
tions to address regional housing issues.
g_ g HCD REVItWED DRAFT HUUSING ELEMEN
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
1 1 1
RH NA 341 229 243 357 1170
Construction 25 23 27 587 662
of RH NA 7.3% 10.0% 11.1%164.4%56.6%
Sources:City of Cupertino, 2014;ABAG, 2014
In the 2007-2013 period, many factors restricted the
development of lower income housing, including the
dissolution of redevelopment agencies, diminished local,
state, and federal funding, legal challenges against
inclusionary housing policies, the Palmer decision invalidating
inclusionary requirements for rental housing, and a depressed
housing market for the majority of the planning period. As a
result, affordable housing production statewide was seriously
impacted. For example, at the State level, some affordable
housing programs either did not issue Notices of Funding
Availability (NOFAs) or the funding levels and grant award
amounts were substantially diminished. At the federal level,
CDBG and HOME funds have been consistently reduced
over the last several years.
According to ABAG, regionally, only 41 percent of the RHNA
was met and only about 22 percent of the lower income
RHNA was met. Furthermore, the majority of the lower
income units were constructed in San Francisco and in the
cities of Oakland and San Jose.
Despite the challenges with funding limitations, market
conditions, and legal constraints, the City of Cupertino
remains committed to affordable housing. Given the
competitive nature of affordable housing funding at the
State and federal levels, generating local funding through its
Housing Mitigation Program (Non-residential and Residential)
is an important strategy to the City. The City is in the
process of updating its Nexus Study, currently progressing on
a fast track, with an anticipated adoption in 2015. The new
Nexus Study would allow the City to continue to implement
its Housing Mitigation Program and to impose reasonable
and appropriate fees that reflect the local housing market
conditions.
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- 1 7 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupertino
7.3. Parcel-Specific Sites Inventory Table
Local housing elements must identify sites that can
accommodate the city's share of the regional housing need
as well as quantify the housing unit capacity of those sites.
Moreover, the sites must be suitable, appropriate and
available within the planning period to accommodate the
housing needs of all income groups. The sites inventory
must be presented on a parcel-specific basis.
i;7 a
F
A1: The Hamptons 316 Ob 032 High Density P(Res)85 6.33
600
A1: The Hamptons 316 06 037 High Density P(Res)85 6.11
A2: Vallco Shopping District 316 20 107 35
A2: Vallco Shopping District 316 20 080 35
A2: Vallco Shopping District 316 20 081 P(Regional
35
A2: Vallco Shopping District 316 20 088 Shopping) 35
A2: Vallco Sho in District 316 20 101 and P(CG) 35PP 9
A2: Vallco Shopping District 316 20 106 Regional Shopping/ Zoning to
35
A2: Vallco Shopping District 316 20 104 Office/Residential be deter- 35
A2: Vallco Sho in District 316 20 105 mined by 35
58.7 389
PP 9
A2: Vallco Sho in District 316 20 100
Specific 35ppgPlanto
A2: Vallco Shopping District 316 20 099 allow 35
A2: Vallco Shopping District 316 20 092 residential 35
A2: Vallco Sho in District 316 20 094
uses. 35PP 9
A2: Vallco Shopping District 316 20 095 35
A2: Vallco Shopping District 316 20 082 35
A3: Oaks Shopping Center 326 27 040 Commercial/Residential P(CG,Res) 30 0.64
A3: Oaks Shopping Center 326 27 039 Commercial/Residential P(CG,Res) 30 5.40 200
A3: Oaks Shopping Center common area Commercial/Residential P(CG,Res) 30 0.72
A3: Oaks Shopping Center 326 27 041 Commercial/Residential P(CG,Res) 30 1.20
A4: Marina Plaza 326 34 Obb Commercial/Office/ P(CG,Res) 35
6.86 200
Residential
A5: Barry Swenson Site 375 07 001 Commercial/Office/ P(CG,Res) 25
0.55 11Residential
Total 86.51 1,400
Note:Realistic capacity for Sites A1,A3,A4 and A5 reduces the maximum developable units by 15 percent. Realistic capacity for Site A2 is the amount
allocated to the site in the Housing Element;a specific plan will be required for Site A2 prior to any new development. Residential capacity for Site A1
reflects the net increase in units.
Source:City of Cupertino,2014
3- 1 8 0 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Techn cal Report
Cupertino's sites inventory to meet the 2014-2022 RHNA
allocation identifies a total of 1,400 units. Detailed
information on each parcel included in the inventory is
presented in Table 7.3 and Table 7.4 for both Scenario A and
Scenario B.
r
A1: The Hamptons Yes Multi family housing
A1: The Hamptons Yes Multi family housing
A2: Vallco Shopping District Yes Shopping center Plan EIR
A2: Vallco Shopping District Yes Shopping center, parking Plan EIR
A2:Vallco Shopping District Yes Shopping center, parking Plan EIR
A2: Vallco Shopping District Yes Shopping center Plan EIR
A2: Vallco Shopping District Yes Shopping center Plan EIR
A2: Vallco Shopping District Yes Shopping center Plan EIR
A2:Vallco Shopping District Yes Shopping center Plan EIR
A2: Vallco Shopping District Yes Shopping center Plan EIR
A2:Vallco Shopping District Yes Shopping center Plan EIR
A2: Vallco Shopping District Yes Shopping center, parking Plan EIR
A2: Vallco Shopping District Yes Parking Plan EIR
A2:Vallco Shopping District Yes Shopping center, parking Plan EIR
A2: Vallco Shopping District Yes Shopping center Plan EIR
A2: Vallco Shopping District Yes Shopping center, parking Plan EIR
A3: Oaks Shopping Center Yes Parking VTA PDA Plan EIR
A3: Oaks Shopping Center Yes Shopping center VTA PDA Plan EIR
A3: Oaks Shopping Center Yes Shopping center VTA PDA Plan EIR
A3: Oaks Shopping Center Yes Parking VTA PDA Plan EIR
A4: Marina Plaza
Yes Shopping center VTA PDA Plan EIR
A5: Barry Swenson Site Yes Vacant VTA PDA Plan EIR
Note:Realistic capacity for Sites A1,A3,A4 and A5 reduces the maximum developable units by 15 percent. Realistic capacity for Site A2 is the
amount allocated to the site in the Housing Element;a specific plan will be required for Site A2 prior to any new development. Residential capacity
for Site A1 reflects the net increase in units.
Source:City of Cupertino,2014
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B- ? 8 1
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
1 "i
t;
b, •
B1: The Hamptons 316 06 032 High Density P(Res) 99 a 6.33
750
B1: The Hamptons 316 Ob 037 High Density P(Res) 99 a 6.11
62: Oaks Shopping Center 326 27 040 Commercial/Residential P(CG,Res) 35 b 0.64
B2: Oaks Shopping Center 326 27 039 Commercial/Residential P(CG,Res) 35 b 5.40 235
B2: Oaks Shopping Center common area Commercial/Residential P(CG,Res) 35 b 0.72
B2: Oaks Shopping Center 326 27 041 Commercial/Residential P(CG,Res) 35 b 1.20
B3: Marina Plaza 326 34 066
Commercial/Office/
P(CG,Res) 35 6.86 200
Residential
B4: Barry Swenson Site 375 07 001
Commercial/Office/
P(CG,Res) 25 0.55 11
Residential
65: Glenbrook 326 27 036 Medium Density R3(10-20) 20 11.62
Apartments
58
B5: Glenbrook 326 27 037 Medium Density R3(10-20) 20 19.72
Apartments
Bb: Homestead Lanes 326 09 061 Commercial/Residential P(CG,Res) 35 1.13
Bb: Homestead Lanes 326 09 051 Commercial/Residential P(CG,Res) 35 0.48
132
Bb: Homestead Lanes 326 09 052 Commercial/Residential P(CG,Res) 35 0.74
B6: Homestead Lanes 326 09 O60 Commercial/Residential P(CG,Res) 35 2.74
Total 64.24 1,386
Note:
a)A General Plan Amendement and zoning change will be ncessary to allow the increase in density from 85 to 99 units per acre on Site B1.
b)A General Plan Amendment and zoning change will be necessary to allow the increase in density from 30 to 35 units per acre on Site B2.
c)A General Plan Amendment and zoning change will be necessary to allow residential uses at 35 units per acre on Site Bb. Existing Zoning for this
site is P(Rec,Enter)
d)Realistic capacity reduces the maximum developable units by 15 percent on Sites B1, B2,B3, B4,and Bb. Realistic capacity of Site B5 is reduced
by 46 percent due to existing site constraints.
e)Residential capacity for Sites B1 and B5 reflect the net increase in units.
Source:City of Cupertino,2014
g_ g 2 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Repo t
1
B1: The Hamptons Yes Multi family housing
B1: The Hamptons Yes Multi family housing
B2: Oaks Shopping Center Yes Parking VTA PDA Plan EIR
B2: Oaks Shopping Center Yes Shopping center VTA PDA Plan EIR
B2: Oaks Shopping Center Yes Shopping center VTA PDA Plan EIR
B2: Oaks Shopping Center Yes Parking VTA PDA Plan EIR
B3: Marina Plaza Yes Shopping center VTA PDA Plan EIR
B4: Barry Swenson Site Yes Vacant VTA PDA Plan EIR
65: Glenbrook Apartments Yes Multi family housing Plan EIR
65: Glenbrook Apartments Yes Multi family housing Plan EIR
B6: Homestead Lanes Yes Shopping center, parking
B6: Homestead Lanes Yes Restaurant
Bb: Homestead Lanes Yes Shopping center, parking
B6: Homestead Lanes Yes Bowling alley, parking
Note:
a)A General Plan Amendement and zoning change will be ncessary to allow the increase in density from 85 to 99 units per acre on Site B1.
b)A General Plan Amendmen t and zoning change will be necessary to allow the increase in density from 30 to 35 units per acre on Site B2.
c)A General Plan Amendment and zoning change will be necessary to allow residential uses at 35 units per acre on Site B6.
d)Realistic capacity reduces the maximum developable units by 15 percent on Sites B1,62, B3, B4,and B6. Realistic capacity of Site B5 is
reduced by 46 percent due to existing site constraints.
e)Residential capacity for Sites B1 and B5 reflect the net increase in units.
Source:City of Cupertino,2014
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 8-1 8 3
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupertino
7.4. Comment Letter to HCD
During the 60-day HCD review period, one comment
letter was submitted to HCD from the Law Foundation of
Silicon Valley. The following responses provide information
pertaining to each of the comments in the letter:
Comment 1: The HE Fails to Analyze Cupertino's
Failure to Produce Affordable Units During the Past
Planning Period.
Local jurisdictions are obligated to identify adequate sites
with appropriate densities and development standards
to accommodate the RHNA. State Housing Element law
recognizes that cities and counties do not have control over
market conditions and often do not have adequate resources
to produce the number of lower income units identified in
the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). The RHNA
is a planning goal and not a production obligation for local
jurisdictions.
Despite the challenges with funding limitations, market
conditions, and legal constraints, the City of Cupertino
remains committed to affordable housing. The City has
added additional information to address this comment on
page B-179 of the Housing Element Appendix.
Comment 2: The HE Should Address Non-
Governmental Constraints on Housing Development
While the Housing Element law specifies that local
jurisdictions must evaluate non-governmental constraints
on housing development, the law is also clear that local
jurisdictions must "address and, where appropriate and
legally possible, remove governmental constraints to the
maintenance, improvement, and development of housing"
Gov't Code 65583(c)(3)], but the same is not required for
nongovernmental constraints.
B- 1 8 4 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Hous ng Element Technical Report
Economic Displacement
As a built out community, housing development in Cupertino
has primarily occurred through recycling of existing
underutilized commercial/mixed use properties. During the
last Housing Element period, no housing project involving the
demolition of existing multi-family housing occurred, resulting
in no direct displacement of existing residents.
For the 2014-2022 Housing Element, future housing is
expected to occur primarily on mixed use properties and by
infilling existing residential developments. The Hamptons
site is the only site with the potential to displace some
existing tenants. The Hamptons has a total of 34 Below
Market Rate (BMR) units within its development and has
expressed to the City that they intend to maintain and
preserve the 34 BMR units. Additionally, Strategy 18,
Housing Preservation Program, provides that if a proposed
development would cause a loss of multifamily housing, the
development must comply with the City's BMR program,
provide at least as much housing in the new development as
currently exists, and mitigate adverse impacts on displaced
tenants.
The City's housing policies are designed to increase the
supply of housing in the City so that the supply of housing
can better meet the demand, and costs will, over time,
be moderated. Strategy 7, the City's Housing Mitigation
program, will ensure that each new residential and
commercial development will either provide affordable
housing or pay housing mitigation fees to increase the
supply of affordable housing. The City has added additional
information to address this comment on page HE-39 of the
Housing Element, under Strategy 18 (Housing Preservation
Program).
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOU5ING ELEMENT B-1 8 5
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupert!no
Community Resistance to Affordable Housing
The 2014-2022 Housing Element was developed with
extensive consultation with the community. The overall
residential sites strategy, including priority and opportunity
sites, was vetted through the public participation process and
provides adequate capacity for the City's new RHNA.
Opposition to affordable housing typically focuses on
concentration, density, and quality. The 2014-2022
Housing Element includes a program to address community
opposition to affordable housing —the City's well-received
Housing Mitigation Program. With the funding generated
by this program, the City has been able to provide assistance
to the underserved segments of the community, including
the elderly, disabled, and fist-time buyers. The City is in
the process of updating the Nexus Study that supports the
implementation of the Housing Mitigation Program. This
update will enhance the effectiveness of the program and
expected to be completed in 2015.
Comment 3: The HE's Quantified Objective and
Programs Require Additional Specificity
Programs Lack Meaningful Timeframes
The Draft 2014-2022 Housing Element has been revised to
provide additional specificity:
Strategy 8 (Below Market-Rate (BMR) Affordable Housing
Fund (AHF): clarified the time frame to solicit projects
annually and updated the time frame for the Nexus Study
from 2016 to 2015}.
Strategy 11 (Incentives for Affordable Housing
Development): clarified the time frame to solicit projects
annually.
Strategy 15 (Residential Rehabilitation): clarified the time
frame to solicit projects annually.
B-1 8 6 HC REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technicai Report
Strategy 16 (Preservation of At-Risk Housing Units):
added language related to conducting outreach to
tenants of any potential conversion and available
affordable housing assistance programs.
The Housing Element has an eight-year planning period,
with many programs to be implemented on an ongoing
basis. Annually, through the City's reporting to the State
HCD on the implementation of the Housing Element, the City
also makes necessary adjustments to ensure more effective
implementation of Housing Element programs.
Include Affordable Housing Goals in the Heart of City
Specific Plan
Strategy 7, the Residential Housing Mitigation Program,
already establishes a citywide afFordable housing goal of 15
percent.
Strengthen Strategy 8 — Nexus Study to Update
Mitigation Fees
The City is expending significant resources in implementing
its housing programs and commitments. Specifically, the City
is fast tracking the update to the Nexus Study for the Housing
Mitigation Program, with an anticipated adoption in 2015,
and Strategy 8 has been revised to show that the Study will
be completed in 2015.
HCD REViEWED DRAFT NOUSING E EMENT g. t g 7
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
C ty of Cupe tino LAW FOUNDATION OF SILICON VALLEY
152 North Third Street,Third Floor
San Jose,CA 95ll2
Fax(408)293-0106 Telephone(408)293-4790 TDD(408)294-5667
January 20, 2015
SENT VIA E-MAIL: hilda.sousa@hcd.ca.gov
Hilda Sousa
Housing and Policy Division
Housing and Community Development
1800 3`d Street
PO Box 952053
Sacramento, CA 94252-2053
Re: Comments on Cupertino's Housing Element
Dear Ms. Sousa:
The following comments on the City of Cupertino's ("City") Draft 2015-2023 Housing Element
Housing Element") are offered by the Public Interest Law Firm and the Fair Housing Law Project
programs of the Law Foundation of Silicon Valley), Urban Habitat, West Valley Community Services,
and Neighborhood Housing Services of Silicon Valley, on behalf of low-income residents of Cupertino.
We also support the comments provided by Non-Profit Housing to HCD regarding Cupertino's Housing
Element. We appreciate your willingness to consider these comments during your review.
The Housin Element fails to analyze Cupertino's failure to produce affordable units durin the
past plannin period.
The draft Housing Element does not adequately analyze the progress and outcomes from the prior
Housing Element, which was quite disappointing in some respects. Most prominently, during the prior
planning period, production of affordable homes lagged far behind Cupertino's RHNA for very low-,
low- and moderate-income families. This failure was by a very large inargin; only 25 of the 341 VLI
units allocated to Cupertino—a woeful 7.3%—were created. The percentages are not substantially
better for other lower-income categories; the City only met 10% of its allocation for low-income units,
and 11.1% of its obligation for moderate income units.
There is no analysis as to why housing production in Cupertino for low-income individuals and
families fell nearly 90°Io short of its affordable housing allocations under the past planning period's
RHNA.
2 The Housing Element does not list the locations and addresses of the units that were
developed during the planning period. HCD should require the City to do a better analysis of the
progress and outcomes from the prior Housing Element and require that the City to analyze the reasons
for the small number of units created during the last planning period, and to recommend programs that
will encourage the development of affordable housing.
The Housin Element should address non-overnmental constraints on housin development.
Revised Public Draft Housing Element, 177.
2 Id.
g_ g g HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Economic Displacement & Rent Burden
We are greatly concerned with the economic displacement of low-income residents from the City of
Cupertino. With no policies protecting low-income residents from rent increases or displacement,
many low-income residents are being forced out of the City. As described in its Housing Element, the
City has some of the highest rents in the area.
3
The Housing Element has no analysis of the economic
displacement of low-income individuals in Cupertino. We believe that this economic displacement is a
pressing issue that is only superficially addressed in the Housing Element. The Housing Element should
do a deeper analysis of the economic displacement and recommend policies that will prevent
displacement of low-income residents.
Community Resistance to Affordable Housing
The Housing Element should include a program to address community resistance (NIMBYism
Not-in-My-Back-Yard") to the development of affordable housing in the City, and resistance to new
housing in general. Many residents have spoken out against new development, and specifically against
affordable housing.
4
Although the City acknowledges NIMBYism as a constraint, the Housing
Element does not contain any programs to address it. The City should adopt a program to address
NIMBYism and educate the public about the benefits of affordable housing.
5
The Housin Element's quanti ed objectives and housin pro rams require additional specificity.
To meet its obligations in an admittedly challenging environment for affordable housing
development, we encourage the City to engage in robust, creative, and strategic programs that will
encourage the development of affordable housing. In general, the qualified objectives and housing
programs currently in the Housing Element lack specific time frames or actions, and require changes to
make them effective tools for development.
The Draft's programs lack meaningful timeframes, which makes it difficult to determine whether
the programs will have beneficial impacts during the planning period. State law requires that the Draft
contain programs that set forth a schedule of actions during the planning period, each with a timeline for
implementation, such that there will be beneficial impacts of the programs within the planning period.
Government Code § 65583(c).)
Cupertino's programs also lack clarity and specificity, which makes is extremely difficult for
members of the public to understand what steps Cupertino will take to achieve its goals and how and
when the public can engage with Cupertino staff. Per HCD, "programs must include a specific time
frame for implementation, identify the agencies or officials responsible for implementation and describe
the jurisdiction's specific role in implementation." (Housing Programs: Conserve and Improve the
Existing Housing Stock, Required Components of Program Actions,
http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/housing_element2/PRO_conserve.php.) Some of the suggested activities
are described below:
3 Revised Public Draft Housing Element, HE-9.
Donato-Weinstein,Nathan,"Cupertino plans for housing, adds office capability to Vallco," Silicon Valley Business Journal,
December 5,2014, available at
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2014/12/OS/cupertino-plans-for-housing-adds-office-capability.html?page=all
5 Revised Public Draft, B-114.
2
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT B-1 8 9
COMMUNITY VISION 2040
City of Cupertino
Include Affordable Housing Goals in the Heart of the City Specific Plan
HCD should encourage the City to include affordable housing goals in the Heart of City
Specific Plan.6 The Heart of the City Specific Plan guides the City's commercial development during
the next planning period. Much of the housing identified in the sites inventory is in the Heart of City
Specific Plan. Given the low affordable housing production numbers during the last planning period,
the City should adopt an affordable housing goal for the Specific Plan. For example, the City could
have a goal that 15 or 20 percent of the units developed in the Heart of the City Specific Plan be
affordable. As this goal applies to a plan, and not a specific project, the plan designation would not be
restricted by the Palmer decision.
Strengthen Strategy S –Nexus Study to update Mitigation Fees
We support the City's Strategy 8—which is to update its Nexus Study for the Housing Mitigation
Plan—and encourage the City to consider raising its impact fees. Cupertino's impact fees are among
the lowest in Santa Clara County, and many other jurisdictions (for example, Sunnyvale and Mountain
View) have recently increased their fees or are seriously considering doing so. We also would
encourage the City to update its Nexus Study within the first year of the planning period, as opposed to
by the end of 2016 as cunently stated in the Housing Element, and consider collaborating taking part in
a county-wide "grand nexus" study which is under development.
We would be happy to speak with you to discuss these comments further. If you have any questions,
please feel free to contact Nadia Aziz at (408) 280-2453.
Sincerely,
s/
Nadia Aziz
Fair Housing Law Project, Law Foundation of Silicon Valley
Naomi Nakano-Matsumoto
West Valley Community Services
Matt Huerta
Neighborhood Housing Services, Silicon Valley
Tony Roshan Samara
Urban Habitat
Fred Yoshida, Student
De Anza College
6 Revised Public Draft,B-83.
3
6-1 9 0 HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT
Appendix B
Housing Element Technical Report
Cc: Paul McDougall, HCD, via email to paul_mcdougall@hcd.
Aarti Shrivastava, City of Cupertino, via email to aartis@cupertino.org
4
HCD REVIEWED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT g . q