Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 11-04-2025 Item No. 11 Municipal Code Amendments for California Buildings Standards Code and Fire Code_Desk ItemCC 11-04-2025 Item #11 Municipal Code Amendments for California Buildings Standards Code and Fire Code Desk Item COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3308 • FAX: (408) 777-3333 CUPERTINO.GOV CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DESK ITEM Meeting: November 4, 2025 Agenda Item #11 Subject Introduce an ordinance for Municipal Code Amendments to Title 16, Buildings and Construction, of the Cupertino Municipal Code adopting the California Buildings Standards Code and Fire Code, for consistency with Assembly Bill 130 and making local exceptions as mandated by the State of California. Recommended Action 1. Introduce and conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. 25-XXX: “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending Chapters 16.02, 16.04, 16.06, 16.10, 16.16, 16.20, 16.24, 16.40, 16.42, 16.54, 16.58, 16.62, 16.64, 16.68 and 16.80 of Titl e 16 of the Cupertino Municipal Code adopting the California Building, Residential, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing, Energy, Wildland-Urban Interface, Fire, Historical Building Code, Fire, Existing Building Code, Green Building Standards Code, Referenced Standards Code, Uniform Housing Code, and Property Maintenance Code with certain exceptions, deletions, modifications, additions and amendments”; 2. Adopt Resolution No. 25-2278 making factual findings with respect to the local geological, topographical, and climatic conditions necessary to make local amendments to the California Building Standards Code. 3. Find the project is exempt from CEQA pursuant to 14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15308. Background: Staff’s responses to questions received from councilmember are shown in italics. Q1: The staff report states "The 2025 Green Buildings Standards Code and 2025 Energy Code supports Cupertino’s sustainability strategy by increasing requirements in several key areas. For example, electric heat pumps are now the preferred form of space conditioning statewide in the 2025 Energy Code. Another example is a new requirement that requires the installation of additional electric vehicle infrastructure and chargers for residential projects." Q1-1: Could you please list all of the "increased requirements" in "several key areas"? Staff response: (State and Local Amendments). A complete list of all updates made by the State to the CalGreen and Energy Codes can be found at: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/-/media/Divisions/BSC/05- Resources/Guidebooks/2025-Title-24-CA-Code-Changes---New-07-25.pdf Below is a list of five examples of changes made to the Energy code for clarification. City of Cupertino has also maintained one electrical make ready amendment for the installation of future heating appliances in non-residential uses. 2025 CA Energy Code 1. Heat Pumps as the New Standard for Single-Family Homes. The 2025 Energy Code establishes a significant new baseline for home construction, moving away from natural gas. The standard design for new single-family homes now requires electric heat pumps for both space heating/cooling and water heating. This change is a major step towards the state's building decarbonization and electrification goals. 2. Expanded Electrification and Central Heat Pump Water Heaters in Multifamily. For new multifamily buildings, the code now requires central heat pump water heating systems when following the prescriptive path. It also mandates that all-electric multifamily buildings include "demand flexible" controls for water heating and have dedicated circuits for future battery storage systems, enhancing grid integration. 3. New Requirements for Controlled Environment Horticulture (CEH). Addressing the growing and energy-intensive indoor agriculture industry, the code introduces a new, dedicated section for Controlled Environment Horticulture. This includes mandatory requirements for horticultural lighting, dehumidification systems, and controls to improve the energy efficiency of these facilities. 4. Enhanced Grid Integration and Demand Response. Across all building types, there is a stronger focus on "grid integration." This includes new requirements for battery storage readiness, automated demand response (ADR) capabilities for HVAC and lighting systems, and controls that allow buildings to intelligently manage their energy use to support the stability of the electrical grid. 5. Introduction of a Prescriptive Path for Nonresidential Lighting. The 2025 code introduces a new, simplified prescriptive path for nonresidential lighting alterations. This provides an alternative to the more complex performance or power density allowance methods, making it easier for smaller projects to comply with lighting efficiency standards. Q1-2: Does the requirement for "installation of additional electric vehicle infrastructure and chargers" apply to all residential projects, including single-family homes? Staff response: These amendments apply to all residential projects, including single-family residences. The update specifies the installation of a complete branch circuit ready for installation of outlet/charger in-lieu of the previous municipal code that only required the installation of the raceway. Q1-3: Does the same requirements apply to commercial projects with parking lots? Staff response: (State Amendment). The electrical vehicle charging requirements for commercial projects can be found in a separate code section (5.106.5) within the 2025 CalGreen code which has become more restrictive than the currently adopted amendments. The new code requires the installation of chargers, not just providing the infrastructure for future installations. Q2: The staff report states "Therefore, mitigation measures are necessary such as: automatic fire suppression systems, communications systems, access to buildings, seismic protection, safety controls for hazardous materials and other safeguards to minimize the risks to citizens, firefighters and property due to the severity of the fire threat and potential response delays." Q2-1: Could you please provide the specific list of changes made to the Fire Code, especially on the increased requirements? List them separately for those in the "Fire Hazard Severity Zone or Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) Fire Area" and those outside such zone. Staff response: (Local Amendments). The proposed amendments to the 2025 Fire Code are not impacted by the separate Wildland-Urban Interface requirements presented in the new part 7 of the Title 24 California Codes and Regulations. Once a response from SCCFD has been received staff will forward to City Council. Q2-2: Please provide a map of the "Fire Hazard Severity Zone or WUI Fire Area". Staff response: The updated map was adopted under Ordinance 25-2272. Please see below: Q2-3: Could you please provide a ballpark estimate in terms of the cost for a typical single- family home for the increased requirements? List them separately for those in the Fire Hazard Severity Zone or WUI" and those outside. Staff response: (State Amendment). This was a discussion topic during the adoption of the new local responsibility maps and can be provided by the State Fire Marshal. Q3: Please confirm or clarify whether the "impacts" stated in Santosh Rao's comment (enclosed) is the true impact of the Building Code once adopted. If it is, please identify whether the corresponding code change is required by the State Law or a local restriction. Here is the list of "impacts" from Santosh's comment. 1. Digital Plan Submittals and Design Professional Requirement Impact: All plans must be digital and often stamped by a licensed design professional, even for modest remodels. Resident-Friendly Alternative: Permit paper or simple digital submittals for projects under $50,000 without requiring professional stamps unless structural work is proposed. Staff response: (State Requirement). The Business and Professions code allows unlicensed individuals/property owners to prepare their own plans for residential projects. But when the design cannot comply with the structural prescriptive provisions provided in the Residential Code, then a licensed professional is required to design and stamp the plan set. 2. Expanded Inspection Impact: Added inspections (moisture, energy, fire) and exposure requirements increase cost and delay. Alternative: Streamline inspections for remodels under 1,000 sq ft and allow certified third- party inspectors for small residential projects. Staff response: (State Requirement). Additional inspections can typically be accommodated concurrently while performing other inspections. These inspections were already being performed per industry standard. The addition of these inspections is for clarity to provide a more detailed list of required inspections. Streamlined inspections can be accommodated through consultants if desired. 3. Roofing Replacement Mandate Impact: Replacing more than 50% of a roof within a year triggers full replacement with Class A fire-retardant material—an expensive requirement even outside wildfire zones. Resident-Friendly Alternative: Exempt Cupertino homes from the Class A mandate. Residents should retain flexibility to use Class B or C roofing materials that meet State fire standards to avoid unnecessary cost burdens. Staff response: (Local Amendment). The proposed amendment aligns with neighboring cities in the county such as Saratoga, Los Altos, Los Gatos, and Monte Sereno. 4. Fireplace Chimney Retrofits Impact: Any remodel exceeding $1,000 requires installing spark arrestors, even when work is unrelated to the fireplace. Alternative: Exempt this entirely for remodels. Staff response: (Local Amendment). Chimneys serving fireplaces or appliances that burn solid fuel, such as wood, can eject hot sparks and embers along with smoke. These embers can easily ignite roofing materials, nearby trees, dry grass, or accumulated debris such as leaves in a gutter. The intent is to provide fire safety for the structure and adjacent structures. Currently, state regulations do not allow the construction of wood burning fireplaces. 5. Pool Safety Retrofits Impact: Existing pools must add alarms or barriers when any home remodel triggers a permit Alternative: Require new pool-safety devices only for new or substantially renovated pools, not for unrelated home work. Staff response: (State Amendment). The adopted amendment is to revise the Cupertino Municipal Code to match the updated state requirements. The installation of safety barriers is only required when a building permit is issued for the construction of a new swimming pool or spa or the remodeling of an existing swimming pool or spa at a private single-family home. This is not required when remodeling the residential structure. 6. Green Building Certification and Deposits Impact: Remodels must now include CALGreen checklists, certification, and refundable deposits forfeited if paperwork is late. Alternative: Exempt this entirely. Staff response: (State Amendment/Requirements). The City of Cupertino has developed a CalGreen Checklist to assist the contractors with compliance and self-certification to show compliance to the state requirements within this adopted code book. A deposit is not currently required for the self-certification. The CalGreen requirements only apply to remodels that increase the structures’ conditioned area, volume, or size. A deposit may be necessary when a larger project is required to meet applicable environmental standards and a third-party is needed to provide the verification during the planning permit process. 7. Seismic Design Restrictions Impact: The draft bans several standard wall-bracing methods, requiring costlier engineered alternatives. Alternative: Permit standard bracing methods allowed under the California Residential Code for small remodels and additions. Staff response: (Local Amendments). The proposed amendment addresses the problem of poor performance of materials such as gypsum wallboard and Portland cement plaster as wall bracing materials in high seismic areas. This amendment reflects the recommendations by the Structural Engineers Association of Southern California (SEACSC) and the Los Angeles City Joint Task Force that investigated the poor performance of these bracing materials that were observed in the 1994 Northridge earthquake. 8. Added Fees and Re-Inspection Charges Impact: New re-inspection fees and green deposits raise overall project costs. Alternative: Waive correction fees and remove deposits for single-family remodels. Staff response: The permit fees are addressed in the adoption of the fee schedule. This is separate from the adoption of the state-mandated codes. The Building Division does not collect deposits and re-inspection fees will be reassessed if city resources are not utilized appropriately with premature scheduling of inspections when work has not been completed to minimum code requirements. Q4: The staff report states "The local Tri-chapter Uniform Code Committee (TUCC) is made up of local Building Officials serving communities in the East Bay (East Bay Chapter),... and takes on the responsibility to review and amend the model codes to enhance regional consistency in application and enforcement of the adopted codes. The committee develops standardized codes, interpretations and local amendments to maintain consistency from one jurisdiction to another." What exactly was the TUCC recommendation? Please include the documents from TUCC to explain their deliberation process to develop "standardized codes, interpretations and local amendments". What exactly was the TUCC recommendation? Please include the documents from TUCC to explain their deliberation process to develop "standardized codes, interpretations and local amendments". Staff response: The TUCC's authority is advisory and informal. It is a collaborative working group of subject-matter experts such as Building Officials from various jurisdictions acting in their professional capacity. TUCC has no legal authority to set policy for the City of Cupertino. The City Council is in no way bound by TUCC's recommendations. The recommendations serve as a technical resource for City staff. Staff reviews the TUCC proposals, evaluates their applicability to Cupertino, and then formulates its own independent recommendation, which is then formally presented to the City Council for consideration. The ultimate authority to adopt any code ordinance rests solely with the City Council through its own public process. Q5: I looked up TUCC (https://eastbayicc.org/TUCC) and they do not seem to follow the Brown Act, the open meeting law, and the last minutes posted is from June 2024. The page does not contain any meeting information for 2025. What is the authority for TUCC to make recommendations to the city council when the recommendations are created in closed meetings? Does this violate the Brown Act? Staff response: The TUCC is only an advisory committee to discuss and help local building officials and staff interpret certain code sections for clarity. It is not a Brown Act body. Q6: Received questions from Vice Mayor about revising/expanding Section 113 for the establishment of an Appeals Board and adding Section 104.1.1 to allow City Council to adopt resolutions and policies to clarify the implementation of Title 16. Staff response: Initial review of these proposed amendments does not raise any concerns. The purpose of the agendized meeting is to adopt the state mandated codes to meet the required timelines for adoption and enforcement. Any input received from the review of this ordinance by the City Council will be considered. A future study session to further discuss and address suggestions/concerns will be arranged.