The URL can be used to link to this page

CC 09-03-2025 Oral Communications_2CC 09-03-2025 Oral Communications Written Comments From:Caroline Gupta To:Public Comments Subject:Re: Presentations and Written Communications for September 3, 2025 City Council Meeting Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 10:24:29 AM Attachments:090325 CityCouncil Luthern Wiliams.docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello, Luthern Williams, Head of School at Tessellations, will be submitting a Speaker Card at tonight’s meeting to share the following message with the City Council and community members in attendance: Wednesday, September 3, 2025 Good evening Council Members, My name is Luthern Williams, and I am the Head of School at Tessellations. Tessellations is honored to be part of Cupertino. We are only one of two schools in the Bay Area dedicated to gifted and asynchronous learners — students who often struggle to fit in traditional classrooms and thrive, yet have incredible potential to give back to the world in significant ways. Because of their academic, social, emotional, and intellectual needs, they require modification in education, teaching, and parenting. We provide special education that is not largely addressed by public or private schools. Cupertino is a city known for the quality of its education, innovation, and excellence — and we believe it is fitting that Tessellations’ has its home here. Our presence in Cupertino brings meaningful community benefits: 1. Strengthening Public Education – By renting from CUSD, we contribute over $3 million each year to the district. That is money that directly strengthens local public schools. 2. Supporting Local Businesses and – Our families and staff shop in Cupertino, dine in Cupertino, and invest in Cupertino every single day. Some families have even moved here to be closer to school. 3. Increase Neighborhood and Real Estate Value - By keeping our campus vibrant and active, we not only prevent the decline that often comes with a vacant site but also add value to the neighborhood as a whole. We want you to know that we hear our neighbors’ concerns about traffic and safety matters, and we have put in place measures to help: staggered drop-offs and pick-ups carpooling programs and on-site staff directing traffic to keep it safe. On June 3, we welcomed 33 neighbors to our school to share information and explore a path forward. While the meeting was productive and a Neighborhood Partnership Committee was formed—including Tessellation's parents, neighbors, and administrators—the Committee has stalled, as some volunteer neighbors appear to have been dissuaded from participating. Despite our efforts and sharing details about our small high school program, misinformation has been presented to the Planning Commission about our 5 students in grades 9 and 10. Even with a clear timeline in our CUP application to move the program off this campus by 2029–2030 and by adding a no driving clause in our contracts, these students, who just want to learn alongside their friends and their community, have been made to feel unwelcome. Being told they cannot return has been devastating for them, their families, and their teachers. No child should ever be a casualty in a political battle, yet the misinformation has caused exactly that harm. I would like to announce that we are now withdrawing our request to include a high school in our CUP, even though it would have meant fewer than 20 students on campus by the time we moved. Cupertino is already known worldwide as a city that fosters innovation and supports excellence in education. Tessellations gives Cupertino another reason to be proud — of being the home to one of the only schools in the Bay Area dedicated to meeting the needs of these exceptional children. Thank you for your time and for giving me the opportunity to speak on behalf of this special school. Best, Caroline Gupta Caroline Gupta Director of Facility & Operations Pronouns: she/her/hers Email: caroline.gupta@tessellations.school https://www.name-coach.com/caroline-gupta Curious about what's happening at school this week? Check out our social media feed! On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 5:34 PM City of Cupertino <cupertino@public.govdelivery.com> wrote: Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page. City of Cupertino Presentations and Written Communications for September 3, 2025 City Council Meeting Presentations and Written Communications have been added for the September 3, 2025 City Council Meeting to include the following: Presentations: CC 09-03-2025 Item No. 16. Accessory Dwelling Units Ordinance Amendments_Staff Presentation CC 09-03-2025 Item No. 17. Oversized Vehicle Parking Ordinance_Staff Presentation CC 09-03-2025 Item No. 18. Stevens Creek Blvd Corridor Vision Study_Staff Presentation CC 09-03-2025 Item No. 19. Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters_Staff Presentation Written Communications: Received by 4:00 p.m. today. The information can be accessed from our website either through Agendas and Minutes or City Records. city of Cupertino City of Cupertino, California Website | 408.777.3200 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014-3202 Manage Preferences | Help This email was sent to caroline.gupta@tessellations.school using GovDelivery Communications Cloud, on behalf of: City of Cupertino, California · 10300 Torre Avenue · Cupertino, CA 95014-3202 Wednesday, September 3, 2025 Good evening Councilmembers, My name is Luthern Williams, and I am the Head of School at Tessellations. Tessellations is honored to be part of Cupertino. We are only one of two schools in the Bay Area dedicated to gifted and asynchronous learners — students who often struggle to fit in traditional classrooms and thrive, yet have incredible potential to give back to the world in significant ways. Because of their academic, social, emotional, and intellectual needs, they require modification in education, teaching, and parenting. We provide special education that is not largely addressed by public or private schools. Cupertino is a city known for the quality of its education, innovation, and excellence — and we believe it is fitting that Tessellations’ has its home here. Our presence in Cupertino brings meaningful community benefits: 1. Strengthening Public Education – By renting from CUSD, we contribute over $3 million each year to the district. That is money that directly strengthens local public schools. 2. Supporting Local Businesses and – Our families and staff shop in Cupertino, dine in Cupertino, and invest in Cupertino every single day. Some families have even moved here to be closer to school. 3. Increase Neighborhood and Real Estate Value - By keeping our campus vibrant and active, we not only prevent the decline that often comes with a vacant site but also add value to the neighborhood as a whole. We want you to know that we hear our neighbors’ concerns about traffic and safety matters, and we have put in place measures to help: ● staggered drop-offs and pick-ups ● carpooling programs ● and on-site staff directing traffic to keep it safe. On June 3, we welcomed 33 neighbors to our school to share information and explore a path forward. While the meeting was productive and a Neighborhood Partnership Committee was formed—including Tessellation's parents, neighbors, and administrators—the Committee has stalled, as some volunteer neighbors appear to have been dissuaded from participating. Despite our efforts and sharing details about our small high school program, misinformation has been presented to the Planning Commission about our 5 students in grades 9 and 10. Even with a clear timeline in our CUP application to move the program off this campus by 2029–2030 and by adding a no driving clause in our contracts, these students, who just want to learn alongside their friends and their community, have been made to feel unwelcome. Being told they cannot return has been devastating for them, their families, and their teachers. No child should ever be a casualty in a political battle, yet the misinformation has caused exactly that harm. I would like to announce that we are now withdrawing our request to include a high school in our CUP, even though it would have meant fewer than 20 students on campus by the time we moved. Cupertino is already known worldwide as a city that fosters innovation and supports excellence in education. Tessellations gives Cupertino another reason to be proud — of being the home to one of the only schools in the Bay Area dedicated to meeting the needs of these exceptional children. Thank you for your time and for giving me the opportunity to speak on behalf of this special school. Good evening Councilmembers, My name is Luthern Williams, and I am the Head of School at Tessellations. Tessellations is honored to be part of Cupertino. We are only one of two schools in the Bay Area dedicated to gifted and asynchronous learners — students who often struggle to fit in traditional classrooms and thrive, yet have incredible potential to give back to the world in significant ways. Because of their academic, social, emotional, and intellectual needs, they require modification in education, teaching, and parenting. We provide special education that is not largely addressed by public or private schools. Cupertino is a city known for the quality of its education, innovation, and excellence — and we believe it is fitting that Tessellations’ has its home here. Our presence in Cupertino brings meaningful community benefits: 1. Strengthening Public Education – By renting from CUSD, we contribute over $3 million each year to the district. That is money that directly strengthens local public schools. 2. Supporting Local Businesses and – Our families and staff shop in Cupertino, dine in Cupertino, and invest in Cupertino every single day. Some families have even moved here to be closer to school. 3. Increase Neighborhood and Real Estate Value - By keeping our campus vibrant and active, we not only prevent the decline that often comes with a vacant site but also add value to the neighborhood as a whole. We want you to know that we hear our neighbors’ concerns about traffic and safety matters, and we have put in place measures to help: ● staggered drop-offs and pick-ups ● carpooling programs ● and on-site staff directing traffic to keep it safe. On June 3, we welcomed 33 neighbors to our school to share information and explore a path forward. While the meeting was productive and a Neighborhood Partnership Committee was formed—including Tessellation's parents, neighbors, and administrators—the Committee has stalled, as some volunteer neighbors appear to have been dissuaded from participating. Despite our efforts and sharing details about our small high school program, misinformation has been presented to the Planning Commission about our 5 students in grades 9 and 10. Even with a clear timeline in our CUP application to move the program off this campus by 2029–2030 and by adding a no driving clause in our contracts, these students, who just want to learn alongside their friends and their community, have been made to feel unwelcome. Being told they cannot return has been devastating for them, their families, and their teachers. No child should ever be a casualty in a political battle, yet the misinformation has caused exactly that harm. I would like to announce that we are now withdrawing our request to include a high school in our CUP, even though it would have meant fewer than 20 students on campus by the time we moved. Cupertino is already known worldwide as a city that fosters innovation and supports excellence in education. Tessellations gives Cupertino another reason to be proud — of being the home to one of the only schools in the Bay Area dedicated to meeting the needs of these exceptional children. Thank you for your time and for giving me the opportunity to speak on behalf of this special school. From:Lina To:Public Comments Cc:City Council; Tina Kapoor; Luke Connolly; Benjamin Fu; Chad Mosley; Gian Martire Subject:PUBLIC COMMENT – NOT ON THE AGENDA Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 3:15:54 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Date: September 3, 2025 Written Comments Regarding the Proposed Mary Avenue Villas Project (APN 326-27-053) To: The Honorable Mayor, Members of the Cupertino City Council, City Manager Tina Kapoor, and City Planning Staff As a longtime resident of the Garden Gate neighborhood, I am submitting this communication to express my strong opposition to the proposed Mary Avenue Villas Project at this site: APN 326-27-053. My participation in creating the petition with Walter, and community advocacy activities including membership in 2 Garden Gate/ Mary Ave WhatsApp groups, allowed me to hear first-hand from diverse Garden Gate residents from Arroyo Village, Glenbrook, Casa De Anza, and the Garden Gate Elementary School neighborhood. I will summarize the collective sentiment: Residents believe this site is fundamentally unsuitable for this housing development for a vulnerable IDD population due to its unsuitable location and the significant negative impacts it would have on community safety, traffic, and overall quality of life. As you are well aware, Mary Avenue is a bustling artery, serving as a main route for school traffic to Garden Gate Elementary School, a truck route for the Cupertino Public Works facility, and a key recreational path. It is already heavily utilized daily by a diverse population of pedestrians, cyclists, joggers, and young children. It doesn't make sense to build onto parking spots and take away public land on this multi-use street that in recent years has become a row of high-density housing. The neighborhood is still recoiling from the loss of retail and enjoyment on this street. Neighbors are rooting for more affordable housing, especially ELI housing, done in a responsible manner. Some neighbors have already started actively brainstorming alternative APNs for this important project. The proposed plan lacks safeguards and presents serious safety hazards for all community members, including future IDD residents. Examples: Poor ingress/egress Driveways placed directly opposite of Glenbrook’s driveway will inevitably lead to increased traffic congestion and a higher risk of accidents No loading zones/short term parking for Amazon trucks, service vehicles (anticipated with IDD population) Increased cars stopping in middle of the road The narrowing of the road, bike lanes, and their buffers, along with the lack of a bypass lane, would also pose a significant risk, particularly for emergency vehicles. Jaywalking problem Parallel parking on only one side of Mary Ave but no crosswalk Danger for IDD population: walkers, canes, wheelchair Furthermore, the project would eliminate 89 public right-of-way parking spots, which are already at maximum capacity during City-sponsored events at Memorial Park and the Quinlan Community Center. This parking shortage will only be compounded by the additional 136 housing units remaining to be built at the former Oaks Center site. Neighbors complain already about how difficult it is to reach Stevens Creek Blvd or I-85 in the summer (with weekly City events) and whenever major community events are held at Memorial Park. Here are several quotes from neighbors: "Terrible idea to build there" “Almost nobody we know think this project is a good idea, nor is it appropriate for the land” “There will be many accidents waiting to happen with such congested housing” “It is too small a parcel for such a huge project” “This location is illogical” "Health and Safety issues must be seriously considered for challenged populations at this location" "Why try to squeeze 40 units into such a narrow lot? Why doesn't the City save up BMR funds for land purchases and do it right, do it with more units?" "Another housing project pitched by the Rotary Club in 2010 for 18 cottages at this very same site was rejected by the City. Why is it that they can reject it then but approve it now? They have already evaluated this site as unsuitable before." "It's already difficult for Glenbrook residents to merge onto traffic during commute and school hours. More housing across the street will increase the burden [on them]" "It is a big problem together with the Westport project" "Do they understand that Mary Ave is our main way out of the neighborhood? The other routes through Stelling are congested, especially with school traffic" "Parking is going to spill over from Memorial Park all the way down to our streets [Lubec and beyond]. Where will we park?" Please view the community petition at: https://www.change.org/p/halt-the-mary-avenue-villas- project-at-this-unsuitable-location I have also attached the slides/photos from today's Sept 3, 2025 City Council Open Communications session for inclusion in the Public Comments. Mary Ave Sept 3 City Council Slideshow.pdf Garden Gate residents urge the City Council to recognize the overwhelming voice of the over 350 residents and visitors who oppose this project and the encroachment on the much needed public right of way. Consider our community's safety and quality of life and halt the Mary Avenue Villas Project at this unsuitable location and find alternative site(s) and mitigations. Sincerely, Lina Garden Gate Resident Mary Avenue Villas Housing Project: The Wrong site A Response to the July 15, 2025 City Council Meeting Study Session (Item 11) Cupertino residents and citizens Garden Gate Coalition Arroyo Village / Westport (APN: 326-27-053) Our voice: over 350 residents and visitors signed a petition opposing this project •Casa De Anza •Glenbrook Apt •Arroyo Townhomes •Garden Gate single family homes •Dog Park visitors •Don Burnett bridge visitors •Memorial Park visitors •Realtors •https://www.change.org/p/halt-the-mary-avenue-villas-project-at-this-unsuitable-location Proposed housing site Garden Gate neighborhood opposition 1. Mary Ave is a bustling artery, serving as a main route for school/family traffic, and a key recreational path. Main route for school traffic and truck route for the Cupertino Public Works Service Center 2. Mary Ave is bustling: cyclists, pedestrians, joggers, young children utilize Mary Ave bike paths to Don Burnett Bridge 3. Multimodal transportation routes fully utilized daily This is a Friday morning at 8am outside Glenbrook Apt and Mary Ave Dog Park Cars entering Glenbrook Line-up of cars exiting Glenbrook, turning right towards Lubec St/Garden Gate Elementary School and left to I-85 / Stevens Creek Blvd Cars going to Stevens Creek and I-85 Pedestrians Bike commuter to Don Burnett Bike/Pedestrian Bridge, Sunnyvale 4. Homestead High School track & field students train along Mary Ave daily 5. Plan poses pedestrian and bike safety hazards •Poor ingress/egress (figure on right) •No loading zones for Amazon trucks, service vehicles •Increased cars stopping in middle of the road •No bypass lane / too narrow •Jaywalking problem •Parallel parking on only one side of Mary Ave but no crosswalk •Danger for IDD population: walkers, canes, wheelchair https://www.cupertino.gov/Your-City/City- Council/Council-Informational-Memos Parking driveway placed directly opposite of Glenbrook’s driveway 6. Narrowed roads and lack of bypass lane will pose safety hazards for emergency vehicles Photo taken on Mary Ave in 2025 7. Mary Ave is the main route out to Stevens Creek Blvd and I-85 for >1,000 Garden Gate residents. Shown below: Bypass route Greenleaf Dr. is congested with school traffic (Garden Gate Elementary School) 8. Parking shortage- we cant stand to lose 89 more! Mary Ave Parking is at maximum capacity during City-sponsored events •despite availability of De Anza College Parking Lot •despite Westport Building 1 (136 units) not yet built at former Oaks Center No parking available for City’s Dog Park visitors No curbside parking for Casa De Anza and Glenbrook visitors Photo taken during Kids 'N Fun Festival Saturday Aug 23, 9. Mary Ave traffic will worsen after Westport project (136 units) completed Photo taken on Mary Ave during Memorial Park community event 2025 10. Lack of long term parking solutions for Memorial Park & Quinlan Event visitors •Will harm the quality and attendance of City and Community Events for ALL residents •De Anza College parking is not a full-proof “solution” currently •“All parking at De Anza requires a paid fee or permit,except in spaces designated for disabled parking or 30-minute visitor parking.” •“The parking fee for special events on campus, including the Flea Market and some Flint Center events, is $5. Parking for select Flint Center events is $10.” •Mary Ave can’t handle the parking needs, and most certainly not after Westport is finished https://www.deanza.edu/parking/permits.html Take-home points This is too small (and polluted/noisy) a parcel for such a large project •ESPECIALLY for the vulnerable, IDD population Adds major community safety concerns Taking over public right-of-way and narrowing roads will lead to accidents Our City desperately needs long term ELI/IDD housing solutions, but… •This site plan is not suitable •Complete mitigation is not feasible From:Cupertino Matters To:City Clerk Cc:Cupertino City Manager"s Office Subject:Oral Communications, City Council, Sept. 3, 2025 Fwd: Mary Avenue Villas Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 3:46:53 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Janet inadvertently missed including you in the emails. Please include in written Oral Communications for City Council, Sept. 3 ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Hal and Janet Van Zoeren <vanzoeren@gmail.com> Date: Wed, Sep 3, 2025 at 3:15 PM Subject: Mary Avenue Villas To: Liang Chao <LiangChao@cupertino.org>, Kitty Moore <Kmoore@cupertino.org>, J.R. Fruen <jr4cupertino@gmail.com>, Ray Wang <rwang@cupertino.org>, Sheila Mohan <SMohan@cupertino.gov>, cc: Andy Lief <alief@charitieshousing.org>, Kathy Robinson <krobinson@charitieshousing.org>, Gia Pham HCC <gia@housingchoices.org>, Hal and Janet Van Zoeren <vanzoeren@gmail.com>, Jean Bedord <Publisher@cupertinomatters.org> Dear City Council Members and City Manager, Our daughter was born in Pittsburgh, PA, where she began receiving “Early Intervention Services" when she was one and a half weeks old. People there were optimistic about her future. When my husband, daughter, and I moved to Cupertino in 1976, many individuals with Down syndrome and other forms of IDD were still living in institutions like Agnews Developmental Center. In fact, the first pediatrician that we went to here gave me the “riot act” for not placing our daughter, who was then almost 6 months old, in an institution because she had Down syndrome. That doctor told me that I was not being fair to my husband, myself, or any future children we might have if we kept raising her at home. About a week later, I went back to that pediatrician and told her off! Here she was able to participate in similar services at both Hope Rehabilitation Services and C.A.R. (Now known as Abilitypath). When she was 2 years old, she attended a Santa Clara County program for children ages 18 months to 3 years old who were experiencing communicative delays. Later, at age 3, she entered the Cupertino School District. At that time, the district only had TMR (Trainable) and EMR (Educable) classes at Nan Allen School, for 3-year-olds who were “mentally retarded”. However, because Cindy was already ahead of the 3-year-olds in those classes, I convinced the newly hired director of special education to open a new class for 3-year-olds, who had benefited from participation in early intervention classes. That class was housed in an empty kindergarten classroom at Murdock School. During recess, the children in this class were not allowed on the kindergarten playground because of the bias with no equipment. Finally, we convinced this community that these children were in no way “contagious” or otherwise detrimental to their children, and our children were allowed to play in the kindergarten outdoor playground. Over the next few years, this class moved to Hoover School, when Murdock closed, and then, when that closed, to Garden Gate School. After 3 years at Garden Gate School, the children in her class were dispersed, and she went to Bishop School in Sunnyvale and later to the Jackson Hearing Center in Palo Alto before returning to Cupertino at Nimitz, Dillworth, Miller Junior High Schools, and finally to Lynbrook High, where she passed the exam to receive her High School Diploma. After Murdock School, she was well received at all her schools by their student bodies, staff, and local communities. After graduating in 1996, Cindy moved into a dormitory at Taft Community College, near Bakersfield, where she earned a Certificate of Achievement from their Transition to Independent Living Program. Finding an apartment in Cupertino, after graduating from Taft College was exceedingly difficult as was getting a HUD voucher even though she had signed on their waiting list when she was exiting junior high school. She applied at Steven’s Creek Village for an “affordable” apartment and at several other apartments that had affordable units, and reapplied annually at these places, but we did not learn until her senior year at Taft that her applications were being tossed in the trash because her annual income was not 2-3 times the “affordable” rent. In 1996, while Cindy was at Taft, I had joined a small group of other parents, and together we created the Housing Choices Coalition to function as a catalyst to bring together the necessary entities to begin developing affordable housing units set aside for individuals with IDD in the bay area. Since then, the organization has created hundreds of units for people with IDD in the Bay Area, but none in Cupertino, where land is exceedingly expensive and incredibly difficult to locate in areas close to the amenities our residents with IDD will need. The Cupertino Rotary has come up with a unique concept for creating land that meets the requirements for building some IDD units. When the Cupertino community was discussing what they wanted to be built on the old Valco property, most community members, whether pro- or anti-housing, were in favor of including 40 set-aside units for people with IDD. Unfortunately, that version of the project will never be built, and those units were lost in the new development plans. The proposed Mary Avenue Project will replace 19 of those lost units, will provide 20 additional units for others who are also experiencing similar deep housing needs, and will create a small apartment community that is diversified rather than being exclusively IDD. Adults like Cindy, living on an annual income of about $12,000, can only afford extremely low- income housing (below 30% of AMI). Others who have some gainful employment or the help of a roommate’s income may qualify for very low-income units (50% below AMI). Please welcome our community members with IDD to stay in Cupertino, where they grew up. Let others see that Cupertino is indeed a compassionate, loving community that extends a helping hand to its members who may be less fortunate, but are equally valued! Thank You! Most Sincerely, 408-482-5763 From:Joe Hauser To:Public Comments Subject:PUBLIC COMMENT - NOT ON THE AGENDA Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 11:06:54 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. To Cupertino Council Members My name is Joe Hauser. I am a 50-year resident of Cupertino. I have deep concerns regarding the safety of occupants, and of the neighborhood problems that would result if the proposed construction of housing for challenged individuals on Mary Avenue is approved. This site is probably the densest, and therefore the most dangerous area in the city for challenged individuals. If the proposed housing is built, the residents will have a very difficult time crossing Mary Avenue (the only pedestrian crossings are at Lubec Street, and near Memorial Park, a distance of close to half a mile). The nearest retail is on the other side of Memorial Park. Since some of these challenged individuals will need walkers, canes or wheelchairs, it presents a safety issue for these people. Besides dodging cars there are also bicycles, and individuals on motorized bikes and skateboards. Even the city vehicles from the city yard will present problems. Furthermore, during major activities at Memorial Park, parking and large crowds will cause difficult situations for all. The immediate area includes: 1. Memorial Park (Tennis, Softball, Pickleball, playground, and picnic facilities) 2. The Senior Center 3. Bicycle lanes to the Mary Avenue Bridge 4. The De Anza College main entrance 5. The Mary Avenue Dog Park 6. The Cupertino City Yard 7. Stevens Creek entrance to the 280/85 freeways 8. A Storage Facility near the Cupertino termination of Mary Avenue  10. Existing homes, condos and apartments Mary Avenue is the only main artery to accommodate the residents. The alternative consists of two residential streets that empty into Stelling Road. This presents a major problem during the morning, and evening rush hour, since the only street that has a traffic light onto Stelling is an s-shaped narrow road that goes by Garden Gate Elementary school. During the morning and mid- afternoon commute, access through this street is almost impossible in that parents bringing their child to school park along the narrow street, or block the street entirely. The other is a street ending with a stop sign to Stelling Road. During the rush hour commutes, it is almost impossible at times to get onto Stelling Road. Many residents therefore use Mary Avenue instead. Also, since most residents use the freeway, Mary Avenue is their only logical choice. Consider the problems if there were an emergency during rush hour. In addition to the problems outlined above, Pollution and Noise from the adjacent freeway can be very detrimental to already compromised individuals. As a resident I have seen several accidents and close calls in this area, especially during Memorial Park events. I personally have a challenged grandson who has Down Syndrome and Autism, so I can relate to the need for projects of this type. However, I strongly feel that there are major safety concerns for individuals who would reside in this project if it remains at this site. We all want the best for the disabled individuals in this housing complex, but this is not a safe or easy access area for them. Certainly, there must be an area in our city where this project is safer, and makes more sense. Please consider alternatives to this very dangerous proposal. Thank You From:Santosh Rao To:City Clerk; Liang Chao; Tina Kapoor; City Council; Benjamin Fu; Luke Connolly Subject:Fw: Questions on city obligations due to Mary Ave Villas. Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 9:03:59 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Clerk, Would you please include the below in written communications for the upcoming city council meeting. Thank you. Dear Mayor Chao, Council Members, I strongly urge you to please ask for future agenda item in the short term for a Mary Ave Villas study session to cover the below questions in detail and deliberate on these. An informational memo is not sufficient. These are serious enough concerns that merit an active deliberation by council on these questions and their responses. Thanks, San Rao (writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident) Begin forwarded message: On Monday, August 25, 2025, 10:02 AM, Santosh Rao <santo_a_rao@yahoo.com> wrote: [Writing on behalf of myself as a Cupertino resident and taxpayer] Dear Mayor Chao, Acting Manager Kapoor, Can we get detailed answers to each of the below questions from the city or better yet publish a FAQ from the city on these questions so all residents can see this. Further I urge you to ask CAO to revisit the info memo on Article 34. The county and city are separate jurisdictions. While Article 34 may not apply at the county level due to use of a previously approved bond measure for affordable housing being the source of many county funding that has nothing to do with whether the city is obligated to consider Article 34 as the city is its own jurisdiction. Please ask for a revised info memo on Article 34. Thank you. Thanks, San Rao (representing myself only, as a Cupertino resident and taxpayer) On Saturday, July 19, 2025, 6:57 AM, Santosh Rao <santo_a_rao@yahoo.com> wrote: [Writing on behalf of myself only, as a Cupertino resident] Dear Mayor Chao, Acting Manager Kapoor, CAO and Director Fu, Deputy Director Connolly, Director Mosley, I asked a number of questions during public comment on Mary Ave Villas. How does the community get answers to these questions. The council voted to move ahead with a number of topics that were not deliberated on. You owe it to residents and taxpayers to thoroughly debate and deliberate on those questions and protect the city from any issues both fiscally and legally. My public comment is here again for your recap: Cupertino City Council Meeting - July 15, 2025 (Part 2) A number of questions: 1. There is case precedent on Article 34 applying to projects involving a city ground lease that was run by a third party operator with city financial support, either with BMR funds or bond money. There are multiple case precedents in fact. Why do these not apply. Cupertino City Council Meeting - July 15, 2025 (Part 2) By City of Cupertino Please be very thoughtful and deliberate on this so as to protect the city from liabilities. 2. Will the city hold title on the ground lease and in documents with debt and equity providers. If so is the city partly liable for issues arising from operator insolvency, operator non-compliance to financial or state/federal/county law obligations. 3. Is the project operations funded from cash from operations. Or does it depend on ongoing city BMR funds in part. What financial ongoing obligations may the city potentially incur in an unforeseen manner due to this project. 4. What happens if Charities goes insolvent / declared bankruptcy on this project. 5. What happens if the Rotary cannot meet its obligations in any form including financially for the project including ongoing operations. 6. Can the city be sued by occupants, vendors, residents or anyone else or someone representing them as the city is the land owner. Please investigate this thoroughly as there is precedent here. 6. What prevents Charities from selling this property to another commercial party that will no longer operate the intended use but convert to regular multifamily. How will you mandate this parcel remain 100% affordable and for IDD in proposed form. 7. Will the city have to takeover operations if no operator can be found. 8. Will the city have to handle move out of occupants if Charities files for bankruptcy on this project and no operator can be found. 9. Will the city need to subsidize this project for operations or for future operators to continue should Charities be unable to. 10. What is the history of any past project like this. What is the longest tenure of a third party operator successfully operating such a project in a public agency ground lease without a sale, change of use, bankruptcy, or needing ongoing public agency support from the land owner. 11. What are the covenant clauses that place obligations on the city from debt and from any state and federal laws involving this type of housing. 12. You have set a precedent where any buffered bike lane with side walk or parking could be converted into a parcel and handed over by- right to an operator in the name of affordable housing only to be sold in a few years for regular commercial use. Is that your understanding as well. If not what prevents this. You just reduced a road lane on DeAnza. By the precedent set you could have set any number of parcels could be created from that DeAnza Blvd road lane you reclaimed. What would prevent that. 13. Please share contact information for Charities so residents may separately ask these and other questions to them Please ensure questions are thoroughly deliberated and thoughtfully addressed rather than prematurely dismissed. Thank you. Thanks, San Rao (writing in behalf of myself only, as a Cupertino resident) From:Santosh Rao To:City Clerk; Liang Chao; Tina Kapoor; Kitty Moore Subject:Fw: City’s General Fund is subsidizing non-residents. Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 8:58:58 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Clerk, Would you please include the below in written communications for the upcoming city council meeting. Thank you. Thanks, San Rao (writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident) Begin forwarded message: On Wednesday, August 27, 2025, 9:41 AM, Santosh Rao <santo_a_rao@yahoo.com> wrote: [Writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident] Dear Mayor Chao, Council Members, Interim Manager Kapoor, Cupertino General fund is used to fund the Cupertino Senior Center whereas other parks and rec facilities are funded by the Enterprise Fund. Unlike other parks and rec facilities the Senior Center is not required to cover its costs. 50% of Cupertino Senior Center are non-residents. What is the city subsidizing out of the General Fund per non-resident. I ask you to agendaize this item or work with Interim Manager Kapoor and Director Sander to address this with the goal that the city does not spend any dollars subsidizing non-residents. The Senior Center is a crown jewel of Cupertino. We must subsidize our resident seniors. We are under no obligation to spend our general fund dollars subsidizing non-residents. Please share what is the subsidy per member, and what is the plan to raise fees on non-residents to cover all costs and maybe even cover the costs of our seniors. We should significantly raise pricing on non-residents to where this center is not being burdened by non-residents. Our residents cannot get enrolled in Senior Center programs when enrollment opens. Please also have this looked into so that enrollment opens for seniors a few days ahead of enrollment for non-residents. Thank you. Thanks, San Rao (writing on behalf of myself only, as a Cupertino resident) From:Rhoda Fry To:Public Comments Cc:Fryhouse@earthlink.net Subject:Oral comms city council sept 3 2025 Mary ave housing Date:Tuesday, September 2, 2025 6:22:20 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Council, I am writing you regarding my concerns about soil contamination on Mary avenue as reported in a document supplied to the city. It is not surprising to me that there is a contamination issue because there was a significant issue nearby in the area of the dog park years ago. The dog park became more expensive and took longer because of the cleanup that was required. I am concerned because this site was never the subject of an EIR. We need to protect the future residents. Can you please shed light on the outcome of this report and what the city is going to do about it? Here is a link: https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url? VPf86qKsJF53bCjIWh42DsJ0pHN4aicClVK19MykfE,&typo=1 Thanks, Rhoda Fry