The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCC 04-07-2026 Searchable PacketTuesday, April 7, 2026 5:45 PM CITY OF CUPERTINO Televised Special Meeting (5:45) and Televised Regular City Council Meeting (6:45) 10350 Torre Avenue, Council Chamber and via Teleconference City Council KITTY MOORE, MAYOR LIANG CHAO, VICE MAYOR J.R. FRUEN, COUNCILMEMBER SHEILA MOHAN, COUNCILMEMBER R "RAY" WANG, COUNCILMEMBER IN PERSON AND TELECONFERENCE MEETING For more information: (408) 777-3200 | www.cupertino.gov AGENDA 1 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 1 of 2882 City Council Agenda April 7, 2026 IN-PERSON AND TELECONFERENCE / PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INFORMATION OPTIONS TO OBSERVE: Members of the public wishing to observe the meeting may do so in one of the following ways: 1) Attend in person at Cupertino Community Hall, 10350 Torre Avenue. 2) Tune to Comcast Channel 26 and AT&T U-Verse Channel 99 on your TV. 3) Watch a live stream online at www.Cupertino.gov/youtube and www.Cupertino.org/webcast 4) Attend in person at a remote Teleconference Location noticed pursuant to Gov. Code 54953(b)(2), which location, if noticed, would be stated on the cover page of this agenda. OPTIONS TO PARTICIPATE AND COMMENT: Members of the public wishing to address the City Council may do so in the following ways: 1) Appear in person for Open Session at Cupertino Community Hall. A. During “Oral Communications”, the public may comment on matters not on the agenda, and for agendized matters, the public may comment during the public comment period for each agendized item. B. Speakers are requested to complete a Speaker Card. While completion of Speaker Cards is voluntary and not required to attend the meeting or provide comments, it is helpful for the purposes of ensuring that all speakers are called upon. C. Speakers must wait to be called, then proceed to the lectern/podium and speak into the microphone when recognized by the Mayor. D. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes each. However, the Mayor may reduce the speaking time depending on the number of people who wish to speak on an item. A speaker representing a group between 2 and 5 members of the public in attendance may have up to 2 minutes per group member to speak, up to 10 minutes maximum. E. Please note that due to cyber security concerns, speakers are not allowed to connect any personal devices at the lectern/podium. However, speakers that wish to share a document (e.g. presentations, photographs or other documents) during oral comments may do so in one of the following ways: a) At the overhead projector at the podium, or b) E-mail the document to cityclerk@cupertino.gov by 3:00 p.m. and staff will advance the Page 2 2 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 2 of 2882 City Council Agenda April 7, 2026 slides/share the documents during your oral comment. 2) Written Communications as follows: A. E-mail comments to the City Council for Open Session at publiccomment@cupertino.gov as follows: a. E-mail comments must be received by 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting in order to be forwarded to the City Council before the meeting. b. Emailed comments received following agenda publication but prior to, or during, the meeting, will be posted to the City’s website after the meeting. c. These e-mail comments will also be received by each City Councilmember, the City Manager, and the City Clerk’s Office. Comments on non-agenda items sent to any other email address will be included upon the sender's request. B. Regular mail or hand delivered addressed to the: City Council, City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014 3) Open Session Teleconference in one of the following ways: A. Online via Zoom on an electronic device (Audio and Video): Speakers must register in advance by clicking on the link below to access the meeting: https://cityofcupertino.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_ZJyUahumQ_-S8FhNskAbgw a) Registrants will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. b) Speakers will be recognized by the name they use for registration. Once recognized, speakers must click ‘unmute’ when prompted to speak. c) Please read the following instructions about technical compatibility carefully: One can directly download the teleconference (Zoom) software or connect to the meeting in their internet browser. If a browser is used, make sure the most current and up-to-date browser, such as the following, is used: Chrome 30+, Firefox 27+, Microsoft Edge 12+, Safari 7+. Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers, including Internet Explorer. B. By Phone (Audio only): No registration is required in advance and speakers may join the meeting as follows: a) Dial 669-900-6833 and enter WEBINAR ID: 828 2032 8666 b) To “raise hand” to speak: Dial *9; When asked to unmute: Dial *6 c) Speakers will be recognized to speak by the last four digits of their phone number. C. Via an H.323/SIP room system: Join from an H.323/SIP room system: H.323: Page 3 3 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 3 of 2882 City Council Agenda April 7, 2026 144.195.19.161 (US West) 206.247.11.121 (US East) Meeting ID: 828 2032 8666 SIP: 82820328666@zoomcrc.com D. Online via the teleconferencing device (Audio and Video) being used to provide access to the meeting from a remote Teleconference Location noticed pursuant to Gov. Code 54953(b)(2), which location, if noticed, would be stated on the cover page of this agenda. a) Speakers are required to notify the City Clerk via email to cityclerk@cupertino.gov prior to noon on the date of the meeting during which they plan to participate and comment from the remote location noticed to ensure the City Clerk is prepared to accept their comment. b) If the teleconferencing device malfunctions impeding access to the meeting from the remote location, the speaker may alternatively participate via the other options for remote participation provided above. NOTICE AND CALL FOR A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special meeting of the Cupertino City Council is hereby called for Tuesday, April 07, 2026, commencing at 5:45 p.m. in Community Hall Council Chamber, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 and via teleconference. Said special meeting shall be for the purpose of conducting business on the subject matters listed below under the heading, “Special Meeting." SPECIAL MEETING ROLL CALL - 5:45 PM 10350 Torre Avenue and via Teleconference STUDY SESSION 1.Subject: An update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan, including a summary of Phase 2, explanations of plan edits, revised scoring criteria, and next steps. Recommended Action: Receive an update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan and provide feedback on the agenda packet attachments. Staff Report A - November 04, 2025, City Council Staff Report B - Revised Project Prioritization Criteria C - Draft Prioritized Project List D - Revised Program and Policy Recommendations E - Draft Project Impact Evaluation Guidelines F - Draft Project Effectiveness Guidelines G - Draft Network Recommendations Maps H - Visual Glossary Page 4 4 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 4 of 2882 City Council Agenda April 7, 2026 ADJOURNMENT REGULAR MEETING CALL TO ORDER - 6:45 PM 10350 Torre Avenue and via Teleconference PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL CLOSED SESSION REPORT CEREMONIAL ITEMS 1.Subject: Proclamation in recognition of April as Donate Life Month. Recommended Action: Present proclamation recognizing April as Donate Life Month. A - Proclamation 2.Subject: Proclamation in recognition of April as Fair Housing Month. Present proclamation recognizing April as Fair Housing Month. A - Proclamation POSTPONEMENTS AND ORDERS OF THE DAY ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Council on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Council and not on the agenda for discussion. Oral Communications shall be limited to 30 minutes. Additional speakers wishing to comment on non-agenda items may be given time to speak at the end of the agenda, after the City Manager's report. Individual speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. As necessary, the Chair may further limit the time allowed to individual speakers, or reschedule remaining comments to the end of the meeting on a first come first heard basis, with priority given to students. In most cases, State law will prohibit the Council from discussing or making any decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the agenda. A councilmember may, however, briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by speakers. A councilmember may also ask a question for clarification, provide a reference for factual information, request staff to report back concerning a matter, or request that an item be added to a future City Council agenda in response to public comment. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 3-10) Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine City business and may be approved by one motion. Typical items may include meeting minutes, awards of contracts, the ratification of accounts payable, and second readings of ordinances. Any member of the Council may request to have Page 5 5 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 5 of 2882 City Council Agenda April 7, 2026 an item removed from the Consent Calendar based on the rules set forth in the City Council Procedures Manual. Members of the public may provide input on one or more consent calendar items when the Mayor asks for public comments on the Consent Calendar. 3.Subject: Approval of February 28, 2026 City Council meeting minutes. Recommended Action: Approve the February 28, 2026 City Council meeting minutes. A - Draft Minutes 4.Subject: Approval of March 17, 2026 City Council meeting minutes. Recommended Action: Approve the March 17, 2026 City Council meeting minutes. A - Draft Minutes 5.Subject: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for February 2026. Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for February 2026. Staff Report A - Chandler Investment Report Feb 2026 6.Subject: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for February 2026. Recommended Action: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for February 2026. Staff Report A – Report of City-wide Receipts, Disbursements, and Cash Balances February 2026 B – Report of City-wide Fund BalancesNet Position February 2026 7.Subject: Consider adopting Resolution No. 26-034 to establish a Policy on Flags on City Property. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 26-034 to establish a Policy on Flags on City Property. Staff Report A - Draft Resolution B - Draft Policy on Flags on City Property 8.Subject: Approval of a resolution to authorize application for the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant operated by the Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 26-035 of the City Council authorizing the City to apply for funds through the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant Operated by The Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project. Staff Report A - Draft Resolution B - Sample FY26 Standard Grant Agreement Template Page 6 6 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 6 of 2882 City Council Agenda April 7, 2026 9.Subject: Approve a budget modification in the amount of $475,000 for ballot measure preparation services and County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voter election services fees. Recommended Action: 1. Approve a Budget Adjustment in the amount of $475,000 in the General Fund for ballot support services with TeamCivX and election services fees from the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters (GL# 100-41-405 700-702) 2. Adopt Resolution No. 26-036 approving budget modification #2526-437, approving a additional General Fund appropriation in the amount of $475,000 for ballot support services with TeamCivX and election services fees from the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters (GL# 100-41-405 700-702). Staff Report A - Draft Resolution 10.Subject: Authorization for Mayor to Sign Multi-Jurisdictional Letter Regarding State Housing Legislation. Recommended Action: Authorize the Mayor to sign a joint letter with West Valley Mayors requesting the State Legislature to consider a temporary pause on new housing legislation to allow for evaluation and implementation of existing laws. Staff Report A – Letter from Mayor Turner to Speaker Rivas PUBLIC HEARINGS Government Code Section 65103.5 limits the distribution of copyrighted material associated with the review of development projects. Members of the public wishing to view plans that cannot otherwise be distributed under Govt. Code Section 65103.5 may make an appointment with the Planning Division to view them at City Hall by sending an email to planning@cupertino.gov. Plans will also be made available digitally during the hearing to consider the proposal. 11.Subject: Consider a Use Permit, Tentative Map, Architectural and Site Approval, and Tree Removal Permit for the construction of a 122-unit residential development, consisting of 66 small-lot single family homes and 56 townhomes located at the Stevens Creek Office Center site, which includes a multi-tenant retail building (Voyager Coffee and Panera Bread). The project utilizes Senate Bill 330 and provisions of State Density Bonus law. (Application No(s): U-2024-008, TM-2024-006, ASA-2024-011, TR-2024-033; Applicant: Kevin Choy, Harvest Properties; Location: 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd; APNs: 326-32-050, -051, -052, and -053.) Page 7 7 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 7 of 2882 City Council Agenda April 7, 2026 Recommended Action: 1. Find the project statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 2. Approve the following permits: a. Adopt Resolution No. 26-037 approving Use Permit (U-2024-008) (Attachment A); and b. Adopt Resolution No. 26-038 approving Architectural & Site Approval Permit (ASA-2024-011) (Attachment B); and c. Adopt Resolution No. 26-039 approving Tentative Map (TM-2026-006) (Attachment C); and d. Adopt Resolution No. 26-040 approving Tree Removal permit (TR-2024-033) (Attachment D). Staff Report A - Draft Resolution U-2024-008 B - Draft Resolution ASA-2024-011 C - Draft Resolution TM-2024-006 D - Draft Resolution TR-2024-033 E - Relevant State Law F - Arborist Report and Peer Review G - CEQA Exemption Memorandum H - Public Comment I - Site Plan and Renderings J - Complete Plan Set ACTION CALENDAR 12.Subject: Award of a consultant agreement with PlaceWorks, not to exceed $468,450, to prepare a Housing Element update (and internal consistency updates to the General Plan), related rezoning, and all necessary environmental review as required under State law, and associated budget modification in the amount of $660,00, to address requirements of Government Code Section 65863 (No Net Loss) and authorize no-cost contract change. Recommended Action: That the City Council: 1. Adopt Resolution No. 26-041 (Attachment A) to approve Budget Modification #2526-436 to increase appropriations in 100-71-702 750-101 (Fiscal Year 2025-26 Adopted Budget) by $660,000 for the fiscal year 2025-26 for the project; and 2. Award a consultant agreement with PlaceWorks for an amount not to exceed $468,450 for a Housing Element update, internal consistency updates to the General Plan, related rezoning, and all necessary environmental review as required under State law (Attachment B) and authorize execution thereof by the City Manager; and 3. Authorize the City Manager to approve contract amendments with PlaceWorks, up to an amount not to exceed $515,425 for additional unanticipated work that is related to the scope of the agreement. Page 8 8 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 8 of 2882 City Council Agenda April 7, 2026 Staff Report A - Draft Resolution B - Contract, Scope of Work, and Fee Estimate 13.Subject: Consider updates to procedures administering the City’s Commissions and Committees and revising the City Commissioners’ Handbook to reflect the new procedures. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution 26-042 updating the Commissioners’ Handbook to (1) appoint alternates to assist with quorum requirements when regular members are absent, (2) promote broad community participation on the City’s commissions and committees, (3) align attendance requirements and Council’s discretion over consequences for missing meetings; (4) recognize advisory body members’ autonomy while ensuring the advisory body’s actions are fairly communicated. Staff Report A - Draft Resolution and Commissioners' Handbook (Exhibit A) B - Commissioners' Handbook - Redline C - Commissioners' Handbook - Clean (Exhibit A) 14.Subject: Determine next steps for the agreement with the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce. Recommended Action: Receive update and provide direction on the agreement with the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce. 1. Authorize Agreement Extension with Revised Scope of Work (Recommended); or 2. Authorize Agreement to Expire without Extension; or 3. Authorize Agreement Extension with Existing Scope and Funding. Staff Report A - Cupertino Chamber Executed Agreement and Scope of Work B - Quarterly Reports April 2024 through December 2025 C - Chamber Relationships in Other Cities D - Revised Scope of Work (redline) E - Revised Scope of Work (clean) F - Revised Compensation (redline) G - Revised Compensation (clean) ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR CITY MANAGER REPORT 15.Subject: City Manager Report A - City Manager's Report ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - CONTINUED COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS Page 9 9 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 9 of 2882 City Council Agenda April 7, 2026 16.Subject: Councilmember Reports A - Councilmember Report, Fruen B - Councilmember Report, Mohan C - Councilmember Report, Moore FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS The Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report is a tentative council meeting agenda calendar that lists upcoming City Council meeting dates and tentative agenda items, all of which are subject to change. 17.Subject: Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report A - Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report ADJOURNMENT Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Requirements: Individuals who influence or attempt to influence legislative or administrative action may be required by the City of Cupertino’s lobbying ordinance (Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 2.100) to register and report lobbying activity. Persons whose communications regarding any legislative or administrative are solely limited to appearing at or submitting testimony for any public meeting held by the City are not required to register as lobbyists. For more information about the lobbying ordinance, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014; telephone (408) 777-3223; email cityclerk@cupertino.org; and website: www.cupertino.org/lobbyist. The City of Cupertino has adopted the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure §1094.6; litigation challenging a final decision of the City Council must be brought within 90 days after a decision is announced unless a shorter time is required by State or Federal law. Prior to seeking judicial review of any adjudicatory (quasi-judicial) decision, interested persons must file a petition for reconsideration within ten calendar days of the date the City Clerk mails notice of the City’s decision. Reconsideration petitions must comply with the requirements of Cupertino Municipal Code §2.08.096. Contact the City Clerk’s office for more information or go to http://www.cupertino.org/cityclerk for a reconsideration petition form. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend this meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. In addition, upon request in advance by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative format. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Cupertino City Council after publication of Page 10 10 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 10 of 2882 City Council Agenda April 7, 2026 the packet will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014, during normal business hours; and in Council packet archives linked from the agenda/minutes page on the City web site. IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code section 2.08.100 written communications sent to the City Council, Commissioners or staff concerning a matter on the agenda are included as supplemental material to the agendized item. These written communications are accessible to the public through the City website and kept in packet archives. Do not include any personal or private information in written communications to the City that you do not wish to make public, as written communications are considered public records and will be made publicly available on the City website. Page 11 11 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 11 of 2882 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item Subject: An update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan, including a summary of Phase 2, explanations of plan edits, revised scoring criteria, and next steps. Receive an update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan and provide feedback on the agenda packet attachments. CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 4/3/2026Page 1 of 1 12 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 12 of 2882 1 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-5732 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3354 CUPERTINO.GOV CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Date: April 07, 2026 Subject An update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan, including a summary of Phase 2, explanations of plan edits, revised scoring criteria, and next steps. Recommended Action Receive an update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan and provide feedback on the agenda packet attachments. Executive Summary The City of Cupertino is developing an Active Transportation Plan (ATP) to update and consolidate the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan and the 2018 Pedestrian Transportation Plan. The ATP is a City Work Program project and fully funded through TDA Article 3 funds, a state funding source for bicycle and pedestrian improvements. Phase 1 of the project established the technical foundation for the Plan, which included a Needs Assessment and Existing Conditions Review that applied methods such as Active Trip Potential and Level of Traffic Stress to identify where walking and biking are most challenging and where short vehicle trips could realistically shift to active modes. Community input validated the analysis and emphasized strong support for improving safety on the Vision Zero High-Injury Network (HIN), connectivity to schools, designing for all ages and abilities, and balancing project tradeoffs for drivers. Phase 2 advanced the Plan through continued engagement and produced clear priorities for both pedestrian and bicycle networks. The ATP and the draft prioritization criteria were presented to Commissions and Council in fall 2025, where there was strong consensus and feedback converged on prioritizing safety (especially near schools and on the HIN), using objective metrics to score projects, and elevating technology solutions. These comments led staff to revise the scoring frameworks and create a new project category, Transportation Technology Corridors. Staff also developed a new set of guidelines to address comments on potential project impacts and on how to measure project effectiveness. Next steps are to release a draft ATP for public review in spring, incorporate revisions, and return to City Council for adoption in late June or early July. 13 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 13 of 2882 2 Background With substantial progress made on implementing the recommended projects from the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan and the 2018 Pedestrian Transportation Plan, a new, comprehensive Active Transportation Plan (ATP) is being developed that will build on those successes and address evolving community needs. Additionally, this unified, citywide plan will align bicycle and pedestrian initiatives while accounting for the needs of motorized vehicles. This coordinated approach ensures consistency across policies and projects, avoids duplication, and addresses overlapping concerns. The City Council approved the FY 24/25 City Work Program on April 3, 2024, with the ATP included as an approved project. City staff then identified Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA3) funds as an external funding source to wholly fund the Plan's development. On December 3, 2024, the City Council authorized the City Manager to award a contract to Alta Planning + Design, Inc., for development of an ATP. Phase 1 Summary Phase 1 of the ATP occurred between March and June 2025. It included policy review, community outreach, and technical analysis to develop data-driven project recommendations. The first step of Phase 1 was to develop a Plan Review Memo to ensure the ATP is consistent with and supports local and regional policies, including Cupertino plans like the General Plan’s Mobility Element and Vision Zero Action Plan, the Countywide Active Transportation Plan, and other relevant documents. Phase 1 also resulted in a Vision, Goals, and Objectives Memo. This document captured the shared vision that Cupertino should be a community where walking, biking, and rolling are easy, safe, and comfortable for everyone. The ATP’s vision, goals, and objectives were developed by consolidating similar and overlapping statements from existing Cupertino plans and refining them using input gathered during Phase 1 outreach to also reflect today's community needs and concerns. The community ranked these goals in order of importance, as shown below: 1. Safety: Consistent with the Vision Zero Action Plan, pursue an active transportation network that reduces the number of serious and fatal crashes involving pedestrians, bicyclists, and other active transportation users to zero. Enact measures to anticipate human error and minimize the impact of traﬃc crashes for all roadway users. 2. Accessibility: Provide a well-connected multimodal transportation network that oﬀers comfortable and convenient walking and biking options to key destinations for all residents and visitors in the City. 3. Maintenance: Active transportation needs should be considered and integrated in all City roadway maintenance activities. 4. Sustainability: Advance environmental quality and economic prosperity for the City by providing inviting active transportation facilities that encourage frequent usage and improve adoption of all non-vehicle modes of travel, resulting in a reduction in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHGs). 14 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 14 of 2882 3 5. Multimodal Balance: Consider multimodal priorities and impacts of all projects to improve sustainable transportation options throughout the City. Limit impacts to all other transportation modes whenever possible, including transit and personal vehicles. 6. Fairness: Provide a multimodal transportation system that is equally distributed across all neighborhoods in Cupertino. During Phase 1, the project team also conducted a Needs Assessment and an Existing Conditions Review. These documents examined the City’s transportation network in detail, identifying where walkers and bikers feel stressed or disconnected. Analyses such as Active Trip Potential and Level of Traffic Stress were applied to determine areas in the City where existing short driving trips could realistically shift to walking or biking. Together, these analysis methods established a clear picture of where gaps are greatest and where investments could potentially yield the greatest community benefits. In parallel with the analysis task, staff reached out to the community to learn which destinations they want to travel to and what barriers prevent them from walking or biking. Residents consistently expressed concerns about safety on the Vision Zero High-Injury Network (HIN), the need for improved connectivity between neighborhoods and schools, the need to consider potential project impacts on drivers, and the importance of designing facilities for people of all ages and abilities. Feedback from the community helped validate the technical analysis, and together, these two sources, along with state and federal design guidance documents such as the Caltrans Design Information Bulletin Number 94 and the Federal Highway Administration Bikeway Selection Guide, were leveraged to develop draft network recommendations. Draft project prioritization criteria that align with the Plan goals were established to assist in ranking the draft network recommendations. The scoring metrics were selected to be consistent with community goals and VTA Measure B funding requirements. These criteria were presented to the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (August 20, 2025), Planning Commission (September 9, 2025), and City Council (November 4, 2025) for review and public comment. These draft project prioritization criteria included the following metrics to rank recommended projects: • Collision History • Stress Level • School Proximity • High Frequency Transit Proximity • Parks & Other Destination Proximity • Active Trip Potential • Roadway Impact • Public Input Phase 2 Summary Following Phase 1, the project transitioned to the Network Recommendations Phase (Phase 2). All Phase 1 documents can be referenced on the project webpage at www.cupertino.gov/atp. This information was included in the staff report (Attachment A) for the November 04, 2025, City Council meeting. During this phase, public engagement continued, with the community 15 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 15 of 2882 4 encouraged to review and comment on the draft network recommendations. Phase 2 ran from August 20 to November 30 and consisted of eight pop-up events and three public hearings. The online input webmap was also updated to allow community members to review and comment on the project recommendations using the project webpage. Phase 2 public outreach once again highlighted repeated concerns about intersection conflicts, particularly with right-turning vehicles, limited visibility, red light running, and speeding through major intersections. For pedestrian projects, respondents strongly supported the proposed Class I shared-use facilities (Tamien Innu, Union Pacific Trail, and Lawrence Mitty Trail). For the Lawrence Mitty Trail, the community specifically noted the value of extending the shared-use path northward and into Santa Clara to improve school access. There was also broad support for the recommended sidewalk projects. Participants noted that safety issues at intersections become more pronounced during commuting hours due to the high volume of traffic. The intersections most frequently mentioned were those along Stevens Creek Boulevard, Bollinger Road, Prospect Road, Stelling Road, De Anza Boulevard, and Blaney Avenue. The community’s preferred pedestrian projects (the top-voted projects online and on outreach boards) were: • Tamien Innu (Shared Use) • Lawrence Mitty Trail (Shared Use) • Blaney Ave and Stevens Creek Blvd (Typology A, B, C Intersection) • Union Paciﬁc Trail (Shared Use) • Paciﬁca Dr and Torre Ave (Typology A Intersection) For bicycling, popular projects included upgrading bike lanes on corridors such as Homestead Road and Blaney Avenue, and addressing intersection safety issues along Stevens Creek Boulevard, especially near Highway 85 and De Anza College. The community’s preferred bicycle projects (the top-voted projects online and on outreach boards) were: • Stevens Creek Blvd (Separated Bike Lanes) • Blaney Ave (Buﬀered Bike Lanes) • Homestead Rd (Buﬀered and Separated Bike Lanes) • Bollinger Rd (Buﬀered Bike Lanes) • Stelling Rd (Buﬀered and Separated Bike Lanes) Overall, participants expressed support for enhanced network connections to schools and requested that some of the proposed buffered bike lanes be upgraded to separated bikeways to improve safety due to high-speed traffic. The corridors that received the most feedback included the recommended shared-use paths, as well as Homestead Road, Stevens Creek Boulevard, Blaney Avenue, and Bollinger Road. Many participants favored the suggested shared-use paths, expressing that they would provide safe alternatives to major roadways and intersections. Concerns about speeding and unsafe intersections along Stevens Creek Boulevard were highlighted, particularly near Highway 85 and De Anza College. Separated bikeways were supported on Foothill Boulevard, Stelling Road, and Wolfe Road. Most unique comments were regarding the recommended neighborhood bike routes, with overall support for the enhanced neighborhood network serving schools. 16 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 16 of 2882 5 Across both pedestrian and bicycle projects, recurring priorities were improving safety for students travelling to schools (Lincoln Elementary, Monta Vista High, and Cupertino High were referenced the most), implementing traffic calming and speed-reduction measures on local streets (speed tables, RRFBs, and when legally permissible implementing automated speed enforcement measures), strengthening connectivity between parks, schools, and neighborhoods, and improving intersection safety. Commission and Council Feedback - Fall 2025 Following Phase 1, the ATP was taken to the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission, Planning Commission, and City Council to solicit feedback on the ATP and the draft project prioritization criteria. Based on the Council's direction and the Commissions’ feedback, staff revised both the draft prioritization criteria and draft programmatic recommendations to address comments from the three bodies. Additionally, staff prepared two new guideline documents to accompany the ATP, which will be applied to new ATP projects to better evaluate potential project impacts and project effectiveness. A review of the Commission and Council feedback showed clear consensus among the Commissions and the Council regarding each body’s comments on the ATP and the draft project prioritization criteria. These areas of agreement were: • Safety should be prioritized, especially near schools and on the Vision Zero HIN. • Scoring criteria should emphasize objective, data-based measures, and Fairness should be removed as a criterion. • Support for improving future decision-making with more robust data collection. • Technology solutions need greater emphasis. Specifically, on August 20, 2025, the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission provided the following comments to staff: • The Commission emphasized considering road maintenance before approving new projects. • Concerns were raised about including public likes and dislikes in the evaluation process, and it was suggested that they be treated cautiously. • Calls were made to ensure decisions are based on data, and to avoid penalizing projects that involve parking or lane removal, as those decisions should be left to the City Council. • There was strong support for prioritizing safety, with extra points suggested for projects near schools and along high-injury corridors. • The evolving nature of the City was acknowledged, with a push to ensure plans address both current and future needs, particularly in growing residential areas. On September 9, 2025, the Planning Commission provided feedback to staff through the following motion: 17 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 17 of 2882 6 • Access Criteria: Award ﬁfteen points if within one-half mile of a school and include senior housing and senior facilities in the “Parks & Other Destinations Proximity” deﬁnition. • Sustainability/Connectivity Criteria: Rename “Sustainability” to “Connectivity” and award ten points for being within one-quarter mile of a trail or low-stress facility, raising the section maximum to twenty points. • Balance Criteria: Subtract ﬁve points if ﬁve or more regularly used parking spaces are removed and subtract ﬁfteen points if a car lane is eliminated for ten percent or more of the project length. • Fairness Criteria: Delete this criterion as it is subjective, unmeasurable, and likely to increase community divisiveness. • Additional ATP Recommendations: Improve high-injury intersections with cameras, evaluate adaptive right-turn-on-red technology, conduct baseline bike counts, and partner with multiple providers for routine bike education. On November 4, 2025, the City Council provided the following feedback to staff through the following motion, during which Vice Mayor Moore made a friendly amendment to add grant funding (Mayor Chao and Councilmember Wang accepted the friendly amendment). • Drop “Public Input” from ranking criteria since it’s not objective and unreliable. • Remove Fairness as a ranking criterion, as the CIP adoption process will address that. • Add “Cost-eﬃciency (user impact)” to ranking criteria - low cost, high impact projects should have high priority; and grant funding. • Add impact to vehicular traﬃc to arterial streets as a ranking criterion to subtract points. • Add and prioritize technology solutions such as sensor-driven pedestrian and bicyclist detection o Safe driving technology – speed feedback signs, red light cameras • Need input from drivers on dangerous points. • School crossing - needs traﬃc management too, in addition to bike and ped infrastructure. • Need data: o Longer trip data from cell phone data, in addition to short trip data o Project list generated o Data for De Anza Buﬀered Bike Lane collected so far. o Hopper data o TDM data from Apple Responses to Commission and Council Feedback - Fall 2025 Staff addressed the comments specifically related to the draft prioritization criteria by: • Modifying the scoring for the HIN and High Injury Intersections (HII) to give greater consideration to projects along the HIN/HII or locations in close proximity. • Modifying School Proximity scoring so that Suggested Routes to School is the chosen metric, rather than a distance-based proximity score for schools. This is more precise and appropriate, as it speciﬁcally addresses safety on known walking and biking routes to school. • Adding senior facilities to the Destinations proximity for scoring. • Creating a new project category for transportation technology. 18 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 18 of 2882 7 • Removing the Fairness criterion so that all metrics are based on objective data. • Adding additional negative scoring for projects that impact Cupertino arterials. • Adding cost eﬀectiveness as a scoring criterion. Staff revised the criteria tables, which are included in Attachment B, and the draft project scores based on the revised criteria are listed in Attachment C. Staff addressed general comments on the ATP by creating a new project category for technology, developing two guideline documents to apply to the new ATP network recommendations during project delivery, and making minor revisions to the programmatic recommendations (Attachment D). These changes include: • The creation of a new project category for transportation technology, so that technology solutions are grouped into corridors and equally ranked against traditional network recommendations, not just listed as programmatic recommendations. This new project category is titled Transportation Technology Corridors. • A Project Impact Evaluation Memo (Attachment E), which lays out the approach for comprehensively assessing project impacts and a path for project delivery when the full extent of parking or roadway impacts is discovered during design. • A Project Eﬀectiveness Memo (Attachment F), which describes how the City can better evaluate long-term project eﬀectiveness. • Minor edits to the programmatic recommendations to better reﬂect the character of Cupertino and address comments received during public hearings. The first major revision to the ATP following the last Planning Commission review in September was the addition of a new project category, Transportation Technology Corridors. This new category addresses the community’s desire and the Council's direction to prioritize technology. To achieve this, transportation technologies were added to the ATP network recommendations as standalone corridor projects rather than as programmatic elements as previously identified. Staff began by reviewing Typology C intersection recommendations (intersection signal and control changes) located at Cupertino-owned signalized intersections and evaluated their overlap with the Vision Zero HIN. Following this exercise, staff analyzed collision data to identify corridors with higher collision rates where “unsafe speed” is listed as the primary collision factor, or where collisions occurred due to traffic signal or sign violations. Lastly, corridors and the intersections along them were screened for implementation feasibility to determine appropriate Technology Corridors. This process helped staff select five corridors that would benefit most from transportation technologies, based on collision history and the City’s ability to control and implement different technologies. These corridors are: • De Anza Blvd: From Homestead Rd to Prospect Rd • Stevens Creek Blvd: From Foothill Blvd to Wolfe Rd • Homestead Rd: From De Anza Blvd to Tantau Ave • Wolfe/ Miller Rd: From Homestead Rd to Calle de Barcelona • Stelling Rd: From I-280 to Rainbow Dr 19 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 19 of 2882 8 Technology solutions in this project category could include red-light cameras, speed-enforcement cameras (when legally permissible), adaptive detection for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists, and audible pedestrian detection. Transportation Technology Corridor projects will be treated the same as traditional network recommendations, and their scores will be normalized against bicycle, pedestrian intersection, and sidewalk projects. Technology Corridors will be ranked in the final project list alongside all other project types. The next notable change is the addition of two new guideline documents to be presented to Council for consideration. These guidelines aim to address two commonly heard themes from the community, Commissions, and Council related to the need to better consider project tradeoffs before construction and to collect more data on ridership resulting from bicycle improvement projects. These two memos (Attachments E and F) describe the approach that staff will follow for new ATP network recommendations. For evaluating project impacts, the Project Impact Evaluation Memo (Attachment E) states that following the Council-approved initiation of any new ATP project, and when parking or traffic impacts are identified during the preliminary engineering (30% design) phase, staff will return to the City Council to present the 30% design, identified impacts, and potential trade-offs. At that meeting, the Council will determine whether the project should undergo a detailed impact analysis tailored to its specific impacts. This level of analysis requires a degree of design detail that is available only once the 30% design phase has been completed. A 30% level of design is necessary to evaluate traffic and parking impacts with technical accuracy because traffic analysis tools, such as Synchro, TransCAD, Cube, or Inrix-based models, require defined lane assignments, turn pockets, signal phasing, parking layouts, and other project features to produce meaningful estimates of delay, queues, diversion patterns, and parking utilization. Additionally, tying the analysis to the identification of parking or traffic impacts at 30% ensures that funding is focused on projects that clearly reveal meaningful operational or parking impacts, rather than expending significant resources on every concept in the ATP, regardless of its risk profile. A description of the potential scope and cost estimates for that work is included in Attachment 4. The second draft guideline document (Attachment F) describes the process by which the City will use data to measure the success of new network recommendations in the ATP. This approach exclusively applies to Class II (striped bicycle lane), Class IIB (buffered bicycle lane), and Class IV (protected bicycle lane) bicycle facilities. The goal of this approach is to ensure that transportation projects identified in the ATP and completed through the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) are successful in furthering the City’s stated goals. The ATP advances City objectives for traffic safety and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, consistent with the Council-adopted Vision Zero Action Plan and Climate Action Plan. The City’s Vision Zero Action Plan calls for eliminating serious and fatal collisions by 2040, and the Climate Action Plan seeks to reduce vehicle trips and their associated emissions in part by shifting short driving trips to walking, biking, and transit. 20 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 20 of 2882 9 To demonstrate progress toward these objectives, staff must track the number of people using new facilities and the safety of those facilities over time. This proposed evaluation approach will allow the City to answer basic but important questions, such as whether these projects encourage the use of active transportation modes, whether collision rates are decreasing even as ridership increases, and, potentially, which types of improvements deliver the greatest benefits. Historically, due to the costly nature of this work, city staff has relied on occasional spot counts or project-specific traffic studies, which provide only short snapshots of bicycle and pedestrian volumes. To fully measure the effect of new ATP projects, staff proposes establishing an approach that combines a one-time citywide baseline count effort along with project-specific before-and- after counts for certain bikeway projects. This effort will require the purchase or lease of bike-ped counting equipment and, potentially, the associated analytics software, so bicycle and pedestrian activity can be measured in a repeatable way. Staff recommends that the first action of the ATP should be to conduct a comprehensive snapshot baseline bicycle and pedestrian count at ATP priority project locations. This initial effort would record how many people are currently biking (and walking, where feasible). Following completion of the baseline count, for individual bikeway projects approved by the Council, staff proposes a before-and-after evaluation approach for Class II, Class IIB, and Class IV bikeways. Upon Council approval of project initiation, staff would begin a pre-construction data collection period at the project site. This establishes a clear pre-project picture of both ridership and safety. After the project is constructed, staff would then repeat this process for post-construction. With these two datasets, staff can calculate changes in average daily and peak-period bicycle volumes, as well as changes in collision rates. The key metric will not just be the number of collisions, but collisions relative to the number of bicyclists or pedestrians. A successful project would be one in which more people use the facility while the collision rate per bicyclist or pedestrian remains the same or decreases. This will be referred to as the Safety Plus Mode Shift (SPMS) rate, which aligns with Vision Zero and Climate Action Plan objectives. These draft guidelines are intended to improve transparency and accountability around new active transportation projects. It also provides Council with a way to compare projects and project types, allows designs to be refined based on what works best in practice, and creates a feedback loop between adopted policy goals and real-world outcomes. By committing to these approaches, the City can signal that success is defined not only by miles of bikeway delivered, but by thoughtful design and quantifiable improvements in safety and mode shift toward sustainable transportation. Commission and Community Feedback - Winter 2026 After incorporating the requested Commission and Council changes, the ATP was brought back to the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission and Planning Commission to gather feedback on the updated draft project list and draft guidelines. A summary of the comments provided by the Planning Commission on February 10, 2026, and the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission on February 18, 2026, is included below. 21 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 21 of 2882 10 At the Planning Commission, the Commission noted that making small adjustments to individual scoring criteria could create a “whack-a-mole effect”, where changes unintentionally shift project rankings elsewhere. That said, there was general agreement that the Safety and School criteria could be refined to better elevate Vision Zero–related projects. Following prioritization, the discussion shifted to emergency response times and the design of Class IV separated bike lanes. Commissioners acknowledged the importance of this issue but did not agree that these facilities universally worsen response times and concluded that the topic should be addressed through the Programmatic Recommendations in the ATP. The Planning Commission provided comments on the ATP through the following individual straw polls: Chair Kosolcharoen conducted a non-binding straw poll to have Council and staff consider the ways in which public safety response time can be incorporated into the project prioritization criteria. (Rao in favor; none opposed; no abstentions) Commissioner Lindskog conducted a non-binding straw poll to revisit the scoring system and put less weight on school routes and less weight on cost-effectiveness criteria to balance things out, and put more weight on intersections in High Injury Network, particularly the top twenty, and increase the ranking on Foothill Blvd. (Scharf, Kosolcharoen, Fung and Lindskog in favor; Rao opposed; no abstentions) Chair Kosolcharoen conducted a non-binding straw poll to support incorporating emergency response times into programmatic recommendations. (Kosolcharoen, and Rao in favor; Scharf Fung, and Lindskog opposed; no abstentions) Commissioner Fung conducted a non-binding straw poll to reinstate proximity to parks in addition to proximity to schools. (Kosolcharoen, Scharf, Fung and Lindskog in favor; Rao opposed; no abstentions) Commissioner Rao conducted a non-binding straw poll to discard the criteria proposed and use the feedback provided at Council. (Rao in favor; Fung and Lindskog opposed; Kosolcharoen and Scharf abstained) At the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission, a consistent theme was that the updated project prioritization criteria could be refined to elevate Vision Zero-related projects. Commissioners emphasized the importance of accounting for the High Injury Network, specifically by adding consideration of KSI locations or Intersections and Corridors of Concern (the top 7 intersections and corridors listed in the Vision Zero Action Plan). Many felt the School Proximity criteria may be over-weighted, and there was interest in shifting from individual project thinking toward clustering or zone strategies for future project delivery. Commissioners also noted that having to normalize scores due to the Balance criterion might cause confusion when reading the table, and this type of scoring could be simplified. Overall, the Commission was supportive of the presented Plan documents and agreed that the scoring system could be adjusted to elevate Vision Zero Corridors and Intersections of Concern in the project list. 22 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 22 of 2882 11 The BPC provided formal comments through the following motion: MOTION: Chair Gerhard Eschelbeck moved, seconded by Vice Chair Munisekaran Madhdhipatla, to approve the ATP draft materials as presented today, with the following set of modifications. 1. Address the inequality or imbalance between the ranking of projects in the ATP and the Cupertino Vision Zero high injury network by reducing the max score for being on a safe route to school to 10 for all three matrices, reducing the goal max score for access from 30 to 20 and increase HIN max scoring to 30. 2. Eliminate 1.25 modifier by making balance in bicycle matrix to a negative score. 3. Consider ATP project clustering as appropriate for future ATP updates. Responses to Commission Feedback - Winter 2026 As both the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission and Planning Commission felt that the Safe Routes to School scoring may be overweighting certain projects, staff informally rescored projects by adding an additional 10 points to projects located on the Vision Zero High Injury Network (for a new Max of 30 points) and limiting the max score for School Proximity to 10 points rather than the previous 20 points. Since the two edits are directionally opposed, projects that score high on both criteria remain comparatively stable, while projects that rely disproportionately on only one of those criteria see the largest shifts. The results demonstrated that the strongest positive movement is concentrated among projects that received only the Vision Zero adjustment. These projects generally gained about 10 points and rose significantly on the list. The greatest negative movement concentrated among projects that received only the SR2S adjustment. Those projects generally lost about 10 points and fell substantially in rank, showing that reducing SR2S from 20 to 10 points has a stronger downward effect when it is not offset by a Vision Zero increase. Projects that received both edits tended to stay closer to their prior position and typically changed by less than 1 point, indicating that the +10 Vision Zero adjustment and the -10 SR2S adjustment largely offset one another. Responses to Community Questions - Winter 2026 Following Commission review, staff also received community questions about how the recommended network facilities are deﬁned and what construction treatments are envisioned for Neighborhood Routes (Class III) and Separated Bike Lanes (Class IV). Where the ATP references Neighborhood Routes (shown on the map in Attachment H, in purple), these are envisioned as Class III bikeways that rely on wayfinding, speed tables, and other context-appropriate treatments rather than bike lane striping that is typically used on larger streets. An example of a Neighborhood Route would be Price Ave near Wilson Park or Greenleaf Dr between Stelling Rd and Beardon Dr. Creation of a Neighborhood Route would generally not require the removal of any on-street parking. An ATP is a planning-level document that identifies project concepts and, for separated bike lanes, does not prescribe a single divider type to be used citywide, nor does it state 23 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 23 of 2882 12 that separated bikeways must only use concrete as the divider. The appropriate separation treatment (flexible delineators, raised median, planters, curb, or parking-protected design) is determined during subsequent project development and design, based on site- speciﬁc context and constraints such as available right-of-way, drainage, driveway and intersection conditions, cost, and community and Council input. As described in the attached Visual Glossary (Attachment H; also available on the project webpage and previously shared with the public during Phase 2 outreach), a separated bike lane is deﬁned as “an on-street bike lane that is separated from motor vehicle traﬃc by a vertical barrier such as bollards, raised medians, planters, or parked cars.” The Recommendations Map illustrates bikeway classiﬁcation and not its design features. Similarly, intersection recommendations in the ATP are presented as conceptual typologies. Speciﬁc treatments at individual intersections will be selected and reﬁned during design through engineering analysis and public engagement. The Visual Glossary provided during Phase 2 outreach remains the clearest summary of the pedestrian and bicycle improvement types that are referenced in the ATP. What Comes Next? Next steps for the ATP will include preparing a draft report for public review in the spring. After the public review period, staff will incorporate any needed revisions and bring the Draft Plan to the City Council for adoption in late June or early July. Sustainability Impact The Cupertino ATP will have positive sustainability impacts because the Plan will develop infrastructure improvement recommendations that increase safety and accessibility for all non- motorized roadway users. Additionally, the ATP will include mode shift strategies to promote walking and bicycling to reduce personal automobile dependency, which will reduce local greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality. Overall, the ATP will help create a healthier, more sustainable community. The development and implementation of an Active Transportation Plan is a Transportation Measure (TR-1) in the Climate Action Plan (2022). • Measure TR-1: Develop and implement an Active Transportation Plan to achieve 15 percent of active transportation mode share by 2030 and 23 percent by 2040 Fiscal Impact The ATP project is fully funded through the City's TDA3 direct allocation. City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description Yes, FY 24-25 Active Transportation Plan: This is a consolidation of existing and new transportation efforts that aim to further the goals outlined in the City’s Vision Zero Initiative, including: 18.1 Review and update bike plan 18.2 Review and update pedestrian plan 24 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 24 of 2882 13 18.3 Review current Complete Streets Policy and propose adjustments to create a better interface between all modes of transportation Council Goal: Transportation, Environmental Sustainability California Environmental Quality Act The project is not subject to CEQA. _____________________________________ Prepared by: Matthew Schroeder, Senior Transportation Planner Reviewed by: Chad Mosley, Public Works Director David Stillman, Transportation Manager Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager Attachments: A – November 04, 2025, City Council Staff Report B – Revised Project Prioritization Criteria C – Draft Prioritized Project List D – Revised Program and Policy Recommendations E – Draft Project Impact Evaluation Guidelines F – Draft Project Effectiveness Guidelines G – Draft Network Recommendations Maps H – Visual Glossary 25 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 25 of 2882 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-5732 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3354 • FAX: (408) 777-3333 CUPERTINO.GOV CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Date: November 4, 2025 Subject An update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan, including a summary of Phase 1 activities and an overview of what to expect during Phase 2. Recommended Action Receive an update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan and provide feedback on the draft project prioritization criteria. Background With substantial progress already made on the implementation of recommended projects from the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan and the 2018 Pedestrian Transportation Plan, a new, comprehensive Active Transportation Plan (ATP) was necessary to build on those improvements and address evolving community needs. Staff also recognized the importance of creating a unified, citywide plan to align bicycle and pedestrian initiatives while accounting for the needs of motorized vehicles. This coordinated approach ensures consistency across policies and projects, avoiding duplication, aligning initiatives, and addressing overlapping concerns. On April 4, 2023, the City Council approved the FY 23/24 City Work Program (CWP), which identified the ATP as an item “to be considered” for inclusion in the following year’s work program. The City Council approved the FY 24/25 CWP on April 3, 2024, with the ATP included as an approved project. City staff then identified Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA3) funds as an external funding source to support the development of the Plan. With funding secured, staff advertised a Request for Proposals for consultant services to assist in developing the Plan. On December 3, 2024, the City Council authorized the City Manager to award a contract to Alta Planning + Design, Inc., for development of the Active Transportation Plan. Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options Phase 1 of the Plan occurred between March and June 2025. It included policy review, community outreach and input, and analysis to develop data-driven project recommendations. 26 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 26 of 2882 The first step of Phase 1 was developing a Plan Review Memo to ensure the ATP is consistent with and supports local and regional policies, including Cupertino plans like the General Plan’s Mobility Element and Vision Zero Action Plan, the Countywide Active Transportation Plan, and other relevant documents. Building on that policy context, the project team then conducted a Needs Assessment, supported by an Existing Conditions Review. These documents examined the City’s transportation network in detail, identifying where walkers and bikers feel stressed or disconnected. Analyses such as Active Trip Potential and Level of Traffic Stress were applied to estimate how many short driving trips could realistically shift to walking or biking. Together, these data-driven methods established a clear picture of where gaps are greatest and where investments could have a significant community impact. In parallel with the analysis work, staff reached out to the community to learn what destinations they want to travel to and what barriers prevent them from walking or biking. Between March and June 2025, the City held 12 outreach events, engaged with more than 1,300 residents and gathered close to 3,000 individual comments. Residents expressed consistent concerns about safety on the Vision Zero High-Injury Network, the need for improved connectivity between neighborhoods and schools, the need to consider the potential project impacts to drivers, and the importance of designing facilities that are for people of all ages and abilities. Feedback from the community helped validate the technical analysis, and together these two sources informed project recommendations. All the outreach performed in Phase 1 is summarized in the Public Participation Memo, which is available on the City’s project webpage. Phase 1 also resulted in a Vision, Goals, and Objectives Memo. This document captured the shared vision that Cupertino should be a community where walking, biking, and rolling are easy, safe, and comfortable for everyone. The ATP’s vision, goals, and objectives were developed by consolidating similar and overlapping statements from existing Cupertino plans and then refined using the input gathered during Phase 1 outreach to also reflect today's community needs and concerns. The community ranked these goals in order of importance, as shown below: 1. Safety: Consistent with the Vision Zero Action Plan, pursue an active transportation network that reduces the number of serious and fatal crashes involving pedestrians, bicyclists, and other active transportation users to zero. Enact measures to anticipate human error and minimize the impact of traﬃc crashes for all roadway users. 2. Accessibility: Provide a well-connected multimodal transportation network that oﬀers comfortable and convenient walking and biking options to key destinations for all residents and visitors in the City. 3. Maintenance: Active transportation needs should be considered and integrated in all City roadway maintenance activities. 4. Sustainability: Advance environmental quality and economic prosperity for the City by providing inviting active transportation facilities that encourage frequent usage and 27 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 27 of 2882 improve adoption of all non-vehicle modes of travel, resulting in a reduction in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHGs). 5. Multimodal Balance: Consider multimodal priorities and impacts of all projects to improve sustainable transportation options throughout the City. Limit impacts to all other modes whenever possible, including transit and personal vehicles. 6. Fairness: Provide a multimodal transportation system that is equally distributed across all neighborhoods in Cupertino. In alignment with the Plan goals, draft project prioritization criteria were developed to assist in ranking the projects identified in the Plan. This ranking will occur following Phase 2 public outreach once the public has evaluated and commented on the recommended projects. The criteria were selected to align with community goals and VTA Measure B funding requirements. These criteria are being presented to the Commissions and Council for review and public comment. The draft project prioritization criteria (Attachment A) include the following metrics to rank recommended projects: • Collision History • Stress Level • School Proximity • High Frequency Transit Proximity • Parks & Other Destination Proximity • Active Trip Potential • Roadway Impact • Public Input Next Steps As Cupertino transitions into Phase 2 of the project, public engagement will continue throughout this stage, with opportunities for residents to review and comment on the draft project recommendations. The outcome will be a comprehensive, actionable Active Transportation Plan that the City Council can consider for adoption by spring 2026. All Phase 1 deliverables and Phase 2 outreach information can be found on the City’s project webpage at www.cupertino.gov/atp. 28 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 28 of 2882 Sustainability Impact The Cupertino ATP will have positive sustainability impacts because the Plan will develop infrastructure improvement recommendations that increase safety and accessibility for all non- motorized roadway users. Additionally, the ATP will include mode shift strategies to promote walking and bicycling to reduce personal automobile dependency, which will reduce local greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality. Overall, the ATP will help create a healthier, more sustainable community. Fiscal Impact The project is fully funded through the City's TDA3 direct allocation in budget unit100-88-844 750-243. City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description Yes, FY 24-25 Active Transportation Plan: This is a consolidation of existing and new transportation efforts aiming to further goals outlined in the City’s Vision Zero Initiative, including: 18.1 Review and update bike plane 18.2 Review and update pedestrian plan 18.3 Review current Complete Streets Policy and propose adjustments to create a better interface between all modes of transportation Council Goal: Transportation California Environmental Quality Act No California Environmental Quality Act impact. _____________________________________ Prepared by: Matthew Schroeder, Senior Transit and Transportation Planner Reviewed by: David Stillman, Transportation Manager Chad Mosley, Public Works Director Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, Interim City Manager Attachments: A – Draft Project Prioritization Criteria 29 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 29 of 2882 City of Cupertino | 1 To: David Stillman, Transportation Manager, City of Cupertino Matthew Schroeder, Senior Transportation Planner, City of Cupertino From: Christopher Kidd, Alta Planning + Design Date: December 10, 2025 Re: Cupertino ATP: Project Prioritization Criteria Introduction Proposed improvements will prioritize the development of a complete active transportation network that imposes fair outcomes, safety, access, and comfort for people of all ages and abilities. Draft criteria were originally proposed in the Summer of 2025, with criteria screened with the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission, Planning Commission, and City Council in the Fall of 2025 for their input. Following input from these bodies, prioritization criteria were updated to better reflect feedback. Criteria for prioritization have been aligned with the Goals of the Active Transportation Plan: -Safety -Access -Sustainability -Multimodal Balance -Cost Effectiveness Projects will be scored according to their corresponding tables below, then scores will be normalized to create a unified set of scores for a single project list. 100 1x 100 80 1.25x 80 1.25x 90 1.11x 30 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 30 of 2882 City of Cupertino | 2 Table 1: Bicycle Network Project Prioritization Matrix Goal Criteria Metric (Source) Scoring Max Score Goal Max Score Safety Collision History Roadway segment is near a corridor identified in the City of Cupertino Vision Zero Action Plan (2024) High Injury Network (HIN) 10 pts if within 1000 ft 20 30 Stress Level Max score from bicycle level of stress analysis 10 pts: BLTS 4 5 pts: BLTS 3 10 Access School Proximity Project is located along a SR2S suggested routes to school 20 30 High Frequency Transit Proximity Presence of major transit stops along the roadway major transit stops (VTA) 2 pts within 0.5 mile proximity to major transit stops (VTA) 5 Parks & Other Destination Proximity Presence of parks, the library, senior center/facilities and shopping centers along the roadway destinations within 0.5 mile per mile of project length. 5 Sustainability Active Trip Potential Roadway has high bicycle trip potential or high e-bike trip potential ATP score 5 10 SAST Gap Score Project is within a high gap score area 5 Balance General Roadway Impact Potential need for lane reduction or parking removal based upon aerial imagery reduction is needed to implement project 0 pts if needed to implement project 10 20 Arterial Roadway Impact Potential need for lane reduction or parking removal based upon aerial imagery 10 Cost Effectiveness Fiscal Responsibility Project cost 5 pts if $500k - $2M 10 10 31 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 31 of 2882 Recommendation Development Approach and Data Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino 3 Table 2: Pedestrian Intersection Project Prioritization Matrix Goal Criteria Metric (Source) Scoring Max Score Goal Max Score Safety Collision History Roadway segment is near a corridor identified in the City of Cupertino Vision Zero Action Plan (2024) High Injury Network (HIN) 10 pts if within 1000 ft 20 30 Stress Level Max score from pedestrian level of stress analysis 10 pts: PLTS 4 5 pts: PLTS 3 10 Access School Proximity Project is located along a SR2S suggested routes to school 20 30 High Frequency Transit Proximity Presence of major transit stops along the roadway major transit stops (VTA) 2 pts within 0.5 mile proximity to major transit stops (VTA) 0 pts if not. 5 Parks & Other Destination Proximity Presence of parks, the library, senior center/facilities and shopping centers along the roadway destinations within 0.5 mile 5 Sustainability Active Trip Potential Roadway has high active pedestrian trip potential 5 10 SAST Gap Score Project is within a high gap score area Scale 0 to 5 pts based on average 5 Cost Effectiveness Fiscal Responsibility Project cost 5 pts if $500k - $2M 10 10 32 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 32 of 2882 Recommendation Development Approach and Data Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino 4 Table 3: Pedestrian Sidewalk Projects Prioritization Matrix Goal Criteria Metric (Source) Scoring Max Score Goal Max Score Safety Collision History Roadway segment is near a corridor identified in the City of Cupertino Vision Zero Action Plan (2024) High Injury Network (HIN) 10 pts if within 1000 ft 20 30 Stress Level Max score from pedestrian and bicycle level of stress analysis 5 pts: PLTS 3 10 Access School Proximity Project is located along a SR2S suggested routes to school 20 30 High Frequency Transit Proximity Presence of major transit stops along the roadway major transit stops (VTA) 2 pts within 0.5 mile proximity to major transit stops (VTA) 0 pts if not. 5 Parks & Other Destination Proximity Presence of parks, the library, senior center/facilities and shopping centers along the roadway destinations within 0.5 mile. 5 Sustainability Active Trip Potential Roadway has high active trip potential 5 10 SAST Gap Score Project is within a high gap score area 5 Cost Effectiveness Fiscal Responsibility Project cost 5 pts if $500k - $2M 10 10 33 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 33 of 2882 Recommendation Development Approach and Data Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino 5 Table 4: Transportation Technology Corridors Prioritization Matrix Goal Criteria Metric (Source) Scoring Max Score Goal Max Score Safety Collision History The corridor includes an intersection identified as a VZAP High Injury Network Intersection 2 pts: if 7-24 10 40 Collision History # of collisions with a cause of "unsafe speed" per mile (according to Cupertino Vision Zero Dashboard Data) corridor (last 5 yrs) by # of collisions with a cause of “unsafe 10 Collision History # of collisions with a cause of "traffic signals and signs" per mile (according to Cupertino Vision Zero Dashboard Data) corridor (last 5 yrs) by # of collisions with a cause of “traffic signals and signs”. 10 Level of Traffic Stress Average PLTS for the corridor 5 pts: PLTS 3 10 Access School Proximity % of corridor length on Suggested Route to School 10 pts: 25–75% 0 pts: <25% 20 30 Parks & Other Destination Proximity Presence of parks, the library, senior center/facilities and shopping centers along the corridor per mile of project length. 10 Sustainability Active Trip Potential Average bicycle/e-bike short-trip share intersecting the corridor 10 20 SAST Gap Score % of corridor length within high SAST gap-score areas 10 34 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 34 of 2882 Pedestrian Bicycle Shared Use Technology W/ Changes Type/ Mode Description Location Cross St A Cross St B Safety Access Sustainability Balance Cost Final Rank New Rank Pedestrian A Intersection De Anza Blvd Lazaneo Dr 30 25 6 0 10 90 1 1 Pedestrian C Intersection De Anza Blvd Rodrigues Ave 30 27 5 0 10 89 2 2 Pedestrian A Intersection Stelling Rd Pepper Tree Ln 25 28 7 0 10 88 3 3 Pedestrian C Intersection De Anza Blvd Mariani Ave 30 20 6 0 10 83 4 4 Pedestrian B Intersection Stelling Rd Alves Dr 20 28 7 0 10 82 5 5 Pedestrian B, C Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd Stelling Rd 25 28 7 0 5 81 6 6 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Vista Dr Stevens Creek Blvd Forest Ave 20 23 8 20 10 81 7 7 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Forest Ave Blaney Ave De Anza Blvd 20 25 5 20 10 81 8 8 Shared Use Crossing Stevens Creek Undercrossing (Feasibility Study) Stevens Creek Trail Linda Vista Trail 25 25 0 20 10 80 9 9 Pedestrian C Intersection Vallco Pkwy Wolfe Rd 25 23 6 0 10 80 10 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Tantau Ave Bollinger Rd Stevens Creek Blvd 25 20 5 20 10 80 11 11 Shared Use Trail Tamien Innu Vallco Pkwy Don Burnett Bridge 30 25 4 20 0 79 12 12 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Blaney Ave John Dr 25 24 4 0 10 78 13 14 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Terry Way Rodrigues Ave Shelly Dr 10 25 6 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Shelly Dr Terry Way Bonny Dr 10 23 6 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Pepper Tree Ln Stelling Rd Bonny Dr 25 26 8 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Bonny Dr Pepper Tree Ln McClellan Rd 20 27 6 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Rodrigues Ave De Anza Blvd Terry Way 20 24 6 20 10 Shared Use Trail Lawrence Mitty Trail Stevens Creek Blvd Barnhart Ave 30 20 8 20 0 78 15 16 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stelling Rd Jollyman Ln Lilac Way 30 20 5 0 5 75 16 19 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Blaney Ave Rodrigues Ave 20 25 5 0 10 75 17 20 Pedestrian A Intersection Miller Ave Phil Ln 25 23 2 0 10 75 18 21 Pedestrian C Intersection Miller Ave Calle De Barcelona 25 23 2 0 10 75 19 22 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd Cupertino Rd 25 24 1 0 10 75 20 23 DRAFT PRIORITIZATION RESULTS - PROJECT LIST These prioritization results present the draft project list using the scoring adjustments recommended by the City Council and Commissions in fall 2025. The “W/Changes” column shows the new rank after applying the additional scoring adjustment recommendations made by the Commissions in winter 2026. This removes 10 points from the max score for Schools (a change from 20 to 10) and adds points to the High Injury Network, so the new max increases from 20 to 30. These changes do not affect the Transportation Technology Corridors, which were evaluated using a separate set of criteria. Rank changes for those projects were not included in this review and should be assumed to remain generally similar. As a result, Column “W/Changes” includes rankings for 198 projects rather than 202. For bicycle projects made up of multiple segments, scores were averaged using a length-weighted approach. Each segment’s score was scaled based on its share of the total project length. For example, if a segment makes up 33% of the overall project length, it contributes 33% of the total project score. These grouped projects are bracketed at the top and bottom in the spreadsheet for easier review. Because each project type used different evaluation criteria, all projects were normalized to a 1–100 scale. Projects are grouped by type to make clear which scoring criteria were applied. Shared-use paths were scored using the bicycle criteria in response to repeated community requests to support all-ages-and-abilities design and strengthen off-street route options. Scores are rounded to the nearest whole number may not sum exactly to the final score. Project Type Legend Location CriteriaProject Current Score 78 14 31 35 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 35 of 2882 W/ Changes Type/ Mode Description Location Cross St A Cross St B Safety Access Sustainability Balance Cost Final Rank New Rank Location CriteriaProject Current Score Pedestrian A, B Intersection McClellan Rd Clubhouse Ln 25 24 0 0 10 74 21 25 Shared Use Trail Union Pacific Railroad Trail Prospect Rd Stevens Creek Blvd 30 22 2 20 0 74 22 26 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Flora Vista Ave Greenleaf Dr 20 26 3 0 10 74 23 29 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd Blaney Ave 25 24 5 0 5 74 24 30 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd Portal Ave 25 23 5 0 5 73 25 32 Bicycle Bike Lane Mariani Ave Bandley Dr De Anza Blvd 25 23 5 10 10 73 26 33 Pedestrian B Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd Phar Lap Dr 25 23 1 0 10 73 27 34 Pedestrian B Intersection Stelling Rd Huntridge Ln 25 20 3 0 10 73 28 35 Pedestrian B, C Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd Torre Ave 20 27 6 0 5 73 29 36 Pedestrian C Intersection Stelling Rd Hazelbrook Dr 20 25 3 0 10 72 30 37 Pedestrian C Intersection Bubb Rd McClellan Rd 25 21 2 0 10 72 31 38 Bicycle Separated Bikeway Finch Ave Phil Ln Stevens Creek Blvd 30 20 7 10 5 72 32 40 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Hyde Ave Shadygrove Dr Bollinger Rd 25 20 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Shadygrove Dr Hyde Ave Stendhal Ln 10 20 3 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Phil Ln Finch Ave Stendhal Ln 15 25 3 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Stendhal Ln Shadygrove Dr Phil Ln 15 20 3 20 10 Pedestrian A Intersection Stelling Rd Gardena Dr 20 24 3 0 10 71 34 42 Technology Transportation Technology Corridor Stevens Creek Blvd Foothill Blvd Miller Ave/Wolfe Rd 32 20 12 0 0 71 35 N/A Pedestrian A, B Intersection Bubb Rd Columbus Ave 25 21 1 0 10 71 36 43 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Linda Vista Dr McClellan Rd Hyannisport Dr 20 21 2 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Hyannisport Dr Linda Vista Dr Bubb Rd 20 20 2 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Fort Baker Dr Hyannisport Dr Presidio Dr 10 21 2 20 10 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) McClellan Rd Byrne Ave Orange Ave 25 24 2 0 5 71 38 44 Shared Use Crossing Carmen Rd Bridge Carmen Rd Stevens Creek Blvd 25 24 1 20 0 70 39 45 Pedestrian A Intersection September Dr McClellan Rd 20 21 4 0 10 70 40 47 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Prince Ave Blaney Ave Portal Ave 20 1 5 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Portal Ave Stevens Creek Blvd Wintergreen Dr 25 21 5 20 10 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Bollinger Rd Hyde Ave 25 21 4 0 5 69 42 50 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) S Tantau Ave Anne Ln Stevens Creek Blvd 25 21 4 0 5 69 43 52 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Festival Dr Stelling Rd Festival Dr Dead End 10 21 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Orograde Pl Stelling Rd Festival Dr 25 22 4 20 10 Shared Use Two Way Path Festival Dr Festival Dr Festival Dr Dead End 15 21 2 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Festival Dr September Dr Festival Dr Dead End 10 20 2 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route September Dr McClellan Rd Festival Dr 20 20 4 20 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Lazaneo Dr Bandley Dr De Anza Blvd 25 6 8 20 10 69 45 13 Pedestrian A Intersection Blaney Ave Wheaton Dr 20 22 3 0 10 69 46 55 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stevens Creek Blvd Tantau Ave Judy Ave 25 21 4 0 5 68 47 56 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Flora Vista Ave Greenleaf Dr Lavina Ct 20 26 3 0 5 68 48 57 Pedestrian A Intersection Torre Ave Pacifica Dr 15 25 5 0 10 68 49 97 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Forest Ave Blaney Ave 20 22 3 0 10 68 50 58 Pedestrian A Intersection N Portal Ave Merritt Dr 20 22 3 0 10 68 51 59 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Carmen Rd - Scenic Blvd Stevens Creek Blvd Scenic Cir Pathway 20 20 0 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route San Fernando Ave Orange Ave Blackberry Farm 10 21 2 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Janice Ave Stevens Creek Blvd Carmen Rd 15 20 1 20 10 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Calvert Dr Loree Ave 20 20 3 0 10 67 52 62 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Blaney Ave Pear Tree Ln 20 21 3 0 10 67 53 63 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Greenleaf Dr Stelling Rd Glencoe Dr 20 25 3 0 5 67 54 68 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Greenleaf Dr 360' East of Stelling Rd 520' West of Beardon Dr 20 25 3 0 5 67 55 69 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Greenleaf Dr Ann Arbor Ave Flora Vista Ave 20 26 2 0 5 66 56 75 Pedestrian A Intersection Alves Dr De Anza Blvd 30 6 6 0 10 66 57 15 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Bandley Dr Valley Green Dr Stevens Creek Blvd 25 5 5 20 10 66 58 18 Bicycle Separated Bikeway N Blaney Ave Homestead Rd Beekman Pl 25 20 4 10 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane N Blaney Ave Bollinger Rd Beekman Pl 25 20 4 10 5 Bicycle Separated Bikeway N Stelling Rd Homestead Rd Gardena Dr 25 5 4 10 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane N Stelling Rd Garden Gate Dr Gardena Dr 25 25 6 10 5 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Scofield Dr Western Dr De Anza Blvd 30 10 7 0 5 65 61 17 Pedestrian A, C Intersection Linda Vista Dr McClellan Rd 20 25 2 0 5 64 62 77 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Bubb Rd Edward Way Vai Ave 25 21 1 0 5 64 63 78 Pedestrian A Intersection Terry Way Rodrigues Ave 10 26 5 0 10 63 64 105 Pedestrian A Intersection Bonny Dr Sola St 10 26 5 0 10 63 65 106 Pedestrian A Intersection Stendhal Ln Phil Ln 15 23 3 0 10 63 66 108 Pedestrian A Intersection Forest Ave Randy Ln 10 24 6 0 10 63 67 109 41 69 68 65 46 76 37 51 60 28 44 59 80 49 82 65 69 71 733372 36 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 36 of 2882 W/ Changes Type/ Mode Description Location Cross St A Cross St B Safety Access Sustainability Balance Cost Final Rank New Rank Location CriteriaProject Current Score Pedestrian B, C Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd De Anza Blvd 30 9 6 0 5 62 68 24 Bicycle Separated Bikeway Foothill Blvd Stevens Creek Blvd Homestead Rd 20 20 2 10 10 62 69 103 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Richwood Dr Miller Ave 30 3 6 0 10 62 70 27 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Mary Ave 500' South of Lubec St 160' North of Point Reyes Ter 15 26 3 0 5 61 71 110 Pedestrian A Intersection Bixby Dr Portal Ave 10 24 5 0 10 61 72 113 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Foothill Blvd Stevens Creek Blvd 20 22 2 0 5 61 73 114 Bicycle Separated Bikeway Stevens Creek Blvd SR 85 Foothilll Blvd 30 25 2 0 0 Bicycle Separated Bikeway Stevens Creek Blvd De Anza Blvd SR 85 30 28 7 0 0 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Wunderlich Dr Barnhart Ave Johnson Ave 10 20 3 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Johnson Ave Wunderlich Dr Bollinger Rd 25 0 3 20 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Foothill Blvd Stevens Creek Blvd Santa Lucia Rd 20 20 0 10 10 60 76 107 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Merritt Dr Larry Way 15 21 2 0 10 60 77 115 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Homestead Rd De Anza Blvd 30 3 10 0 5 60 78 39 Pedestrian A Intersection Granada Ave Orange Ave 10 23 4 0 10 60 79 116 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Bubb Rd 230' South of Stevens Creek Blvd 1,200' North of Results Way 30 6 6 0 5 59 80 41 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Ainsworth Dr Hartman Dr Varian Way 0 20 2 20 10 Shared Use Two Way Path Varian Park Path Varian Way Amelia Ct 15 21 1 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Amelia Ct Varian Park Crescent Rd 10 22 1 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Crescent Rd - Hillcrest Rd Amelia Ct Cupertino rd 10 21 1 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Cupertino Rd Foothill Blvd Carmen Rd 10 21 1 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Carmen Rd Cupertino Rd Dead End 20 23 0 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Varian Way Ainsworth Dr Varian Park 0 22 1 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Starling Dr Foothill Blvd Chace Dr 10 20 3 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Chace Dr Starling Dr Hartman Dr 0 21 3 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Hartman Dr Chace Dr Ainsworth Dr 0 20 3 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Ann Arbor Ave Greenleaf Dr Lauretta Dr 10 23 1 20 5 Shared Use Two Way Path Memorial Park Path Memorial Park Alves St 15 7 10 20 5 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Ann Arbor Ct Christensen Dr Ann Arbor Ave 0 4 1 20 5 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Alves Dr Anton Way Bandley Dr 25 5 9 20 5 Shared Use Two Way Path Memorial Park Path Christensen Dr Mary Ave 15 6 6 20 5 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Torre Ave Town Center Ln 10 27 5 0 5 58 83 118 Pedestrian A Intersection Hyannisport Dr Linda Vista Dr 10 24 2 0 10 58 84 120 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Alderbrook Ln Creekside Park Bollinger Rd 25 0 2 20 10 57 85 64 Pedestrian B Intersection Ann Arbor Ave Greenleaf Dr 10 25 1 0 10 57 86 122 Bicycle Bike Lane Miller Ave Stevens Creek Blvd Calle De Barcelona 30 0 7 10 10 57 87 66 Pedestrian C Intersection De Anza Blvd I-280 30 3 2 0 10 57 88 48 Pedestrian A Intersection Wheaton Dr Portal Ave 10 23 3 0 10 57 89 123 Pedestrian B Intersection Bollinger Rd Miller Ave 30 1 4 0 10 56 90 51 Pedestrian B Intersection Hyde Ave Willowgrove Ln 10 21 4 0 10 56 91 124 Pedestrian B, C Intersection Bubb Rd Stevens Creek Blvd 30 6 4 0 5 56 92 53 Pedestrian A Intersection Palo Vista Rd Janice Ave 10 24 1 0 10 56 93 125 Pedestrian C Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd Blandley Dr 20 9 6 0 10 56 94 54 Pedestrian A Intersection Alderbrook Ln Atherwood Ave 10 23 2 0 10 56 95 128 Pedestrian A Intersection Foothill Blvd Voss Ave 10 23 1 0 10 56 96 129 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Palm Ave Foothill Blvd Scenic Blvd 10 20 0 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Lockwood Dr Voss Ave Stevens Creek Blvd 5 20 1 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Voss Ave Lockwood Dr Foothill Blvd 0 20 0 20 10 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection SR 85 Stevens Creek Blvd 30 5 4 0 5 55 98 60 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection SR 85 Stevens Creek Blvd 30 5 4 0 5 55 99 61 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Beardon Dr Dunbar Dr Greenleaf Dr 10 25 3 0 5 55 100 131 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Miller Ave Greenwood Dr 25 3 6 0 10 55 101 65 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Heatherwood Dr Tuscany Pl Colony Hills Ln 10 1 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Tuscany Pl Heatherwood Dr Jollyman Park 10 1 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Kentwood Ave Tiptoe Ln City Limits (South) 10 0 5 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Tiptoe Ln Kentwood Ave Coloy Hills Ln 10 2 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Colony Hills Ln Heatherwood Dr Fallenleaf Ln 10 0 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Rose Blossom Dr McClellan Rd Huntridge Ln 10 22 4 20 10 74 88 85 97 75 117 82 86 104 111 102 81 61 58 58 56 55 61 37 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 37 of 2882 W/ Changes Type/ Mode Description Location Cross St A Cross St B Safety Access Sustainability Balance Cost Final Rank New Rank Location CriteriaProject Current Score Bicycle Neighborhood Route Huntridge Ln Rose Blossom Dr Stelling Rd 25 20 4 20 10 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Stern Ave Tilson Ave 10 21 3 0 10 54 103 132 Pedestrian A Intersection Sterling Ave Barnhart Ave 10 20 3 0 10 54 104 133 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Stelling Rd Homestead Rd 25 6 7 0 5 54 105 67 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Beardon Dr Fargo Dr Dunbar Dr 10 25 3 0 5 54 106 134 Pedestrian C Intersection De Anza Blvd I-280 30 1 2 0 10 54 107 70 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Bollinger Rd Clifden Way 30 4 4 0 5 54 108 71 Bicycle Separated Bikeway N Wolfe Rd Pruneridge Ave 300 ft. South of Perieter Rd 25 20 3 0 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane N Wolfe Rd Homestead Rd Pruneridge Ave 25 0 5 0 5 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane N Wolfe Rd Stevens Creek Blvd 300 ft. South of Perimeter Rd 30 20 6 0 5 Pedestrian A Intersection Foothill Blvd Cristo Rey Dr 10 21 2 0 10 54 110 135 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Alves Dr Stelling Rd 680' East of Stelling Rd 20 8 10 0 5 54 111 72 Pedestrian A Intersection Randy Ln Merritt Dr 10 20 2 0 10 54 112 136 Pedestrian B Intersection Merritt Dr Vista Dr 10 20 2 0 10 54 113 137 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Stelling Rd Echo Hill Ct 30 2 1 0 10 54 114 74 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Wheaton Dr N Portal Ave Carol Lee Dr 20 1 3 20 10 53 115 81 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Barnhart Ave Wunderlich Dr 10 20 3 0 10 53 116 138 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Santa Teresa Dr Rae Ln Terrace Dr 0 20 1 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Terrace Dr Santa Teresa Dr Bubb Rd 10 0 0 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Linda Vista Dr Hyannisport Dr Santa Teresa Dr 10 20 1 20 10 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Lockwood Dr Stevens Creek Blvd 10 20 2 0 10 52 118 142 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Palm Ave S Foothill Blvd Scenic Blvd 15 23 1 0 2 52 119 143 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Kirwin Ln Lonna Ln De Anza Blvd 30 4 5 0 2 51 120 79 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Stevens Creek Blvd Foothill Blvd Permanente Rd 20 20 0 0 10 50 121 140 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Ann Arbor Ave Grenola Dr Hazelbrook Dr 10 25 1 0 5 50 122 145 Pedestrian A Intersection Bollinger Rd Blaney Ave 25 1 4 0 10 50 123 83 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Carmen Rd Janice Ave Scenic Blvd 10 24 1 0 5 50 124 146 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Forest Ave 260' East of Randy Ln 110' West of Toni Ct 10 22 3 0 5 50 125 148 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Stelling Rd Orion Ln 25 1 3 0 10 50 126 84 Pedestrian B Intersection Mary ave Lubec St 5 23 1 0 10 49 127 149 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Bollinger Rd Estates Dr 25 2 2 0 10 48 128 87 Pedestrian A Intersection Pacifica Dr Whitney Way 0 25 4 0 10 48 129 150 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stevens Creek Blvd Silver Oak Ln Camino Vista Dr 10 22 2 0 5 48 130 151 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Bollinger Rd Harland Dr Westlynn Way 30 0 3 10 5 48 131 93 Pedestrian A Intersection Lance Dr Bollinger Rd 25 1 2 0 10 48 132 89 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Kim St McClellan Rd Kirwin Ln 0 3 5 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Kim St Bollinger Rd De Foe Dr 5 1 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Westacres Dr McClellan Rd Shelly Dr 10 3 6 20 10 Shared Use Two Way Path Kim St Kirwin Ln Bollinger Rd 15 1 4 10 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route De Foe Dr Kim St Dumas Dr 10 20 4 20 10 Pedestrian A Intersection San Fernando Ave Orange Ave 0 24 4 0 10 48 134 153 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Foothill Blvd Cristo Rey Dr Vista Knoll Blvd 10 21 2 0 5 47 135 154 Technology Transportation Technology Corridor Stelling Rd I-280 Rainbow Dr 12 26 5 0 0 47 136 N/A Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Stevens Creek Blvd 200' East of Lockwood Dr Prado Vista Dr 10 21 2 0 5 47 137 155 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Martinwood Way Bollinger Rd 20 4 4 0 10 47 138 90 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stelling Rd Echo Hill Ct 65' South of Echo Hill Ct 30 2 1 0 5 47 139 91 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Kirwin Ln Erin Way Kim St 10 0 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Erin Way Stelling Rd Kirwin Ln 25 1 4 20 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane S Stelling Rd Prospect Rd Orogrande Pl 25 0 2 10 10 47 141 94 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stelling Rd Squirehill Ct Rainbow Dr 30 1 1 0 5 46 142 92 Technology Transportation Technology Corridor Wolfe Rd/Miller Ave Homestead Rd Calle de Barcelona 15 16 10 0 0 46 143 N/A Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stevens Creek Blvd Lockwood Dr 160' East of Lockwood Dr 10 20 2 0 5 46 144 158 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stevens Creek Blvd Lebanon Dr 170' East of Lebanon Dr 10 20 2 0 5 46 145 159 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Stevens Creek Blvd 170' East of Lebanon Dr Lockwood Dr 10 20 2 0 5 46 146 160 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Stevens Creek Blvd California Oak Way 5 20 2 0 10 46 147 161 Technology Transportation Technology Corridor De Anza Blvd Homestead Rd Prospect Rd 16 5 20 0 0 45 148 N/A Pedestrian B Intersection Hyannisport Dr Fort Baker Dr 0 24 2 0 10 45 149 163 Pedestrian A Intersection 100' East of Scenic Ct Cir Pathway 0 25 1 0 10 44 150 165 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Stelling Rd Catalano Ct Orion Ct 25 1 4 0 5 44 151 95 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Saich Way Alves Dr 10 8 7 0 10 44 152 126 119 52 48 121 109 133 96 140 117 112 54 47 38 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 38 of 2882 W/ Changes Type/ Mode Description Location Cross St A Cross St B Safety Access Sustainability Balance Cost Final Rank New Rank Location CriteriaProject Current Score Pedestrian A Intersection Scenic Blvd Palm Ave 0 24 1 0 10 43 153 167 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Foothill Blvd 170' South of Voss Ave Palm Ave 5 23 1 0 5 43 154 168 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Kingsbury Pl Scotland Dr Gardenside Ln 0 1 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Poppy Way Rainbow Dr Plum Blossom Dr 5 0 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Gardenside Ln Kingsbury Pl Rainbow Dr 5 0 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Jamestown Dr Plum Blossom Dr Prospect Rd 5 0 6 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Plum Blossom Dr Primrose Way Jamestown Dr 0 1 6 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Squirewood Way Scotland Dr Stelling Rd 25 0 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Scotland Dr Squirewood Way Kingsbury Pl 10 0 3 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Rainbow Dr Stelling Rd Bubb Rd 15 0 1 20 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Rainbow Dr Stelling Rd De Anza Blvd 15 0 4 10 10 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Alderbrook Ln Bollinger Rd 25 2 2 0 5 42 157 98 Pedestrian A Intersection Merriman Rd Voss Ave 0 22 1 0 10 42 158 169 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Orion Ln Stelling Rd Hunterston Pl 25 1 2 0 5 42 159 99 Pedestrian A Intersection Johnson Ave Tilson Ave 20 0 3 0 10 42 160 100 Pedestrian B Intersection Ainsworth Dr Bahl St 0 22 2 0 10 42 161 170 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) Gardena Dr Stelling Rd Gardena Ct 20 5 7 0 2 41 162 101 Pedestrian A Intersection Ainsworth Dr Hartman Dr 0 21 2 0 10 41 163 171 Pedestrian A Intersection Lockwood Dr Voss Ave 0 21 1 0 10 41 164 172 Pedestrian A Intersection Santa Teresa Dr Columbus Ave 0 22 0 0 10 41 165 174 Pedestrian C Intersection Stelling Rd Rainbow Dr 20 1 1 0 10 40 166 139 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Bollinger Rd Farallone Dr 20 3 4 0 5 40 167 102 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Johnson Ave Wunderlich Dr 0 20 2 0 10 40 168 175 Technology Transportation Technology Corridor Homestead Rd De Anza Blvd Tantau Ave 26 10 0 0 0 40 169 N/A Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Bollinger Rd De Anza Blvd Kim St 15 1 4 10 10 39 170 141 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Waterford Dr Stelling Rd Primrose Way 5 0 4 20 10 Bicycle Neighborhood Route Primrose Way Waterford Dr Plum Blossom Dr 0 1 6 20 10 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Foothill Blvd 170' South of Stevens Creek Blvd Rancho Ventura St 20 3 2 0 5 37 172 147 Pedestrian A Intersection Kirwin Ln Felton Way 10 4 5 0 10 36 173 152 Pedestrian A Intersection Imperial Ave Olive Ave 10 3 4 0 10 34 174 157 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Bubb Rd Regnart Rd 15 0 1 0 10 33 175 162 Pedestrian A Intersection Kirwin Ln Erin Way 10 1 4 0 10 32 176 164 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Foothill Blvd Santa Paula Ave 10 3 1 0 10 31 177 166 Bicycle Separated Bikeway Homestead Rd El Sereno Ave S Bernardo Ave 5 2 1 0 10 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Homestead Rd S Bernardo Ave Stelling Rd 25 5 4 0 5 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane Homestead Rd Crist Dr El Sereno Ave 0 0 1 0 5 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Stevens Canyon Rd Riverside Dr 10 2 0 0 10 28 179 173 Pedestrian A Intersection Stelling Rd Waterford Dr 10 1 1 0 10 27 180 176 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Stelling Rd Seven Springs Pkwy 10 1 1 0 10 27 181 177 Bicycle Buffered Bike Lane De Anza Blvd Rainbow Dr Rainbow Dr 10 0 6 0 10 26 182 178 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Kim St Bollinger Rd 5 1 3 0 10 25 183 179 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Foothill Blvd Walnut Cir 314' South of Rancho Ventura St 10 3 1 0 5 24 184 180 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Foothill Blvd Santa Paula Ave Kinst Ct 10 3 1 0 5 24 185 181 Pedestrian A, C Intersection De Anza Blvd Prospect Rd 10 0 3 0 5 23 186 182 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) McClellan Rd 250' East of Stevens Canyon Rd 90' west of San Leandro Ave 10 3 0 0 5 22 187 183 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Orion Ln Derbyshire Dr Hunterston Pl 10 1 1 0 5 21 188 184 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Prospect Rd Stelling Rd 10 0 0 0 5 20 189 185 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Kim St Kirwin Ln 0 2 3 0 10 19 190 186 Pedestrian A, B Intersection Bubb Rd Rainbow Dr 5 0 0 0 10 19 191 187 Pedestrian A Intersection Dempster Ave Fitzgerald Ave 0 4 1 0 10 18 192 188 Pedestrian A Intersection Wildflower Way De Anza Blvd 0 1 3 0 10 18 193 189 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Alcalde Rd Merriman Rd Foothill Blvd 5 3 1 0 5 18 194 190 Pedestrian A Intersection Dempster Ave Stokes Ave 0 2 1 0 10 16 195 191 Pedestrian B, C Intersection Rainbow Dr Gardenside Ln 5 1 1 0 5 15 196 192 Pedestrian A Intersection Weymoth Dr Rainbow Dr 0 1 1 0 10 15 197 193 Pedestrian Sidewalk (2 Sides) De Anza Blvd Rainbow Dr Wildflower Way 0 1 5 0 5 15 198 194 Pedestrian B, C Intersection Rainbow Dr De Anza Blvd 0 1 5 0 5 14 199 195 Pedestrian A, B, C Intersection Via Roncole Prospect Rd 0 0 3 0 5 11 200 196 Pedestrian Sidewalk (1 Side) Alcalde Rd Avenida Ln Alicia Ct 0 1 1 0 5 10 201 197 Pedestrian A, C Intersection Canyon Oak Way Cristo Rey Dr 0 0 0 0 5 6 202 198 155 171 144 156 130 156178 127 39 29 42 42 39 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 39 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 1 To: David Stillman, Transportation Manager, City of Cupertino Matthew Schroeder, Senior Transit and Transportation Planner, City of Cupertino From: Christopher Kidd and George Foster, Alta Planning + Design Date: January 1, 2026 Re: Cupertino ATP: Policy and Program Recommendations This memo provides a summary of new legislation that may impact policy and program recommendations, as well as a consolidated, updated set of recommended policies and support programs to enhance the existing walking and rolling networks in the City of Cupertino. Several plans are referenced throughout this document, but the Active Transportation Plan will be referred to in capital letters as the Plan. The memo first summarizes Recent Regional, State, and Federal Policies, then presents detailed tables of Policy and Program Recommendations. Although regional Equity informs all recommendations, these tables focus on the following key areas of potential policy and programmatic investment: Engineering, Encouragement, Education, Enforcement, and Evaluation. As an appendix, there is also an overview of relevant Existing Cupertino Policy Recommendations. Recent Regional, State, and Federal Policies The following State-level legislation has been passed in the last five years and will affect the implementation of this Active Transportation Plan and its accompanying policies and programs. Roadway Safety Enhancements Daylighting (AB 413): This law, which took effect in 2024, aims to improve visibility at crosswalks by prohibiting vehicles from stopping or parking within 20 feet of the vehicle approach side of any unmarked or marked crosswalk or 15 feet of crosswalks with curb extensions. Speed Safety System Pilot Program (AB 645): This program, established by a bill signed in October 2023, permits select cities to install speed cameras to deter reckless driving. Cities like San Francisco have already implemented the program, deploying cameras in high-risk areas. There is potential for Cupertino to implement speed cameras if this pilot is successful. Reckless Driving Crackdown (SB 1509): This legislation aims to deter reckless driving, particularly speeding, by strengthening enforcement and considering the use of technology like speed cameras. Safer, More Inclusive Street Design (SB 960): This bill enhances the California State Highway System by requiring Caltrans to incorporate features such as bike lanes, sidewalks, and transit facilities into its planning and projects. Speed Limit Setting (AB 43): Legislation was passed to authorize Caltrans and local authorities to set, retain, or restore speed limits on highways, including the possibility of a reduction of five mph in some circumstances. 40 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 40 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 2 Infrastructure Funding and Regulation Federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA): Though not state-specific legislation, California was expected to receive over $40 billion in federal funds from this bipartisan act, to be invested in various transportation projects, including roads, bridges, and other transportation infrastructure. However, many federally funded active transportation projects are currently facing political obstruction, and their future is unclear. CEQA Exemptions for Bicycle and Mass-Transit Projects (SB 288): This bill added statutory California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exemptions for bicycle projects. SB 922 extended and enhanced the CEQA exemptions for sustainable transportation projects—including bike lanes, pedestrian infrastructure, bus rapid transit, and light rail—through 2030. This expedites the approval and construction of these climate-friendly projects by reducing administrative delays and costs, thereby promoting cleaner, safer, and more equitable transportation options statewide. 41 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 41 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 3 Policy and Program Recommendations This section includes descriptions of existing and proposed policies and programs, organized by programmatic/policy category: Equity, Engineering, Encouragement, Education, Enforcement, and Evaluation. These policy and program recommendations align with the goals of the Active Transportation Plan: Safety, Accessibility, Maintenance, Sustainability, Multimodal Balance, and Fairness. Examples are provided for many to illustrate implementation. Equity The proposed programmatic and policy recommendations outlined in this memo should be prioritized through a regional equity lens to support efforts to improve the City’s active transportation network. This should be incorporated into all future policies and programs through early community involvement, targeted outreach, attending existing community events, hosting events in affected communities, and providing translation services. 42 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 42 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 4 Engineering Pedestrian and bicycle support facilities provide increased comfort and convenience for individuals who use active modes to get around. Table 1 summarizes existing and proposed engineering policies and programs in the City that work in conjunction with existing infrastructure to improve the user experience. Infrastructure improvements should be prioritized near schools, parks, transit stops, medical centers, senior centers, City services, commercial areas, and HIN/HII. Note: Several of the recommended policies and programs in this section are already in place in Cupertino but have significant potential for codification and expansion. Table 1 Existing and Recommended Engineering Policies and Programs Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples Existing Vision Zero Policy The City adopted a local Vision Zero Action Plan to better understand local collisions and collaborate across City Departments to improve safety for walking and rolling in Cupertino. Safety Cupertino Vision Zero Action Plan Complete Streets Policy The City adopted a local Complete Streets policy to ensure streets are designed to enable safe, convenient, and comfortable travel for users of all ages and abilities, regardless of their mode of transportation. Accessibility and Multimodal Balance Cupertino Complete Streets Policy Online Information and Service Requests The City currently operates a telephone, app, and online service request system (Cupertino311), which allows residents to submit an issue or request for a specific service for traffic signals, roadway issues, or sidewalk obstructions. Accessibility and Maintenance Cupertino Maintenance Services Wayfinding Wayfinding signage provides important destination, distance, and navigation information to roadway users. Specific wayfinding signs designed for people walking and bicycling can be expanded and improved at key locations across the City to further support active transportation. Accessibility Cupertino Wayfinding Project Recommended Pedestrian-Scale Lighting Pedestrian-scale streetlights are designed at a lower height and intensity to enhance visibility, safety, and comfort for people walking in urban or public spaces. By increasing visibility, it improves safety and crime outcomes. It also enhances the walkability and aesthetic appeal of public spaces, encouraging more foot traffic and fostering a sense of community. LED lights can be used to reduce energy costs, and shields can be used to minimize night sky pollution or limit light pollution on adjacent private property. Safety Alameda, CA 43 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 43 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 5 Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples Crossing Facility Improvements City may improve crossing facilities by implementing high-visibility crosswalks, advance stop or yield markings, pedestrian refuge islands, and raised crosswalks or intersections. These enhancements would make people walking and rolling more visible to drivers. Safety Sacramento, CA Evaluate Right Turn on Red Restrictions Evaluate intersections to limit vehicles from turning right at a red-light signal on a case-by-case basis, when traffic operations analysis indicates that the restriction can be implemented without creating unacceptable vehicle delay. Safety Ann Arbor, Michigan Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) The City may consider LPIs at signalized intersections, with a plan moving forward to update key intersections. Safety CA AB 2264 (2022) Active Detection at Intersections for People Walking and Rolling Develop an inventory of signalized intersections without active detection for people walking and rolling and create a way forward for standardization and inclusion at signal heads. Establish a standardized approach for integrating reliable detection technologies—such as passive infrared, video, or radar sensors—ensuring they are accurately placed along built and desired routes. Define clear specifications for detector performance, placement, and integration with signal systems, and incorporate upgrades into signal maintenance, capital projects, and retiming efforts. Include staff training, contractor guidance, and periodic evaluation to ensure effective and consistent deployment citywide. Safety and Accessibility Santa Clara County, CA Active Detection White Paper Curb Extensions at Intersections Consider additional curb extensions at school-zone intersections and mid-block crossings to reduce vehicle speeds and improve overall transportation safety. Safety San Francisco, CA Sidewalk and Curb Cut Improvement Program The City may develop a sidewalk and curb cut improvement program with a dedicated funding stream to close sidewalk gaps and add curb ramps at key locations. This program would allow the City to be more responsive to local citizen complaints for sidewalk and curb cut enhancements. Safety, Fairness, and Maintenance Palo Alto, CA 44 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 44 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 6 Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples End-of-Trip Facilities End-of-trip facilities such as bike parking, water stations, kiosks, and fix-it stations help encourage people to bike more by providing the amenities they need at the end of their trip. These facilities are typically most suitable in City right-of-way areas with high concentrations of walking and rolling, such as the Cupertino Library. Accessibility and Sustainability Los Angeles, CA Lower Speed Limits Create a program to analyze and reduce speeds where appropriate along arterial and collector roadways based on the CA Manual for Setting Speed Limits. Lowering the speed limits on streets may lessen the severity and frequency of crashes. Safety Santa Monica, CA Lower School Zone Speed Limits Per California Vehicle Code Section 22358.8, the City may consider reducing speed limits around School Zones, which may be lowered to 15 mph on all two- way residential streets within 500 feet of schools, and 25 mph up to 1,000 feet from schools. Safety and Accessibility Oakland, CA Quick Build Project Implementation Quick Build projects typically include less expensive materials such as paint, thermoplastic, and bollards/delineators (or other sturdy but removable materials). These improvements share many of the same safety benefits as their permanent counterparts, but can be implemented more quickly and cost-effectively, allowing the City to be responsive to safety concerns while still planning for long-term funding and implementation. The City should consider implementing Quick Build projects identified in completed school walk audits, in addition to other priority areas. Safety and Maintenance CalBike Design Guide Quick Build White Paper Expand the City Tree Canopy Consider planting shade trees and other greening elements along corridors where people may be walking and rolling, and within school zones. Caltrans considers street trees to be traffic-calming elements as they are often attributed to a perceived narrowing of the roadway, a sense of rhythm and human scale created by framing the street, and the perception that the driver is in a place where they are more likely to encounter people walking or rolling and cross-traffic. Sustainability and Fairness San José, CA 45 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 45 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 7 Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples Update Street Design Standards Review and update all relevant policy and design standards regarding bikeway facilities, path and sidewalk design, materials, and supporting amenities to be consistent with the most recent best practices and state and federal standards for bicycle and pedestrian facilities and in compliance with the latest ADA Standards for Accessible Design and Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG). Accessibility, Maintenance, and Multimodal Balance Sacramento, CA Maintenance Program Maintenance is deeply tied to the usability and lifespan of these engineering recommendations. Cupertino can develop more detailed protocols for regular street sweeping and debris removal on bikeways—particularly Class IV protected lanes and Class I multi-use paths—to maintain comfort and reduce risks. Expanded, detailed vegetation management can address overgrowth that obstructs visibility at intersections, encroaches onto sidewalks and paths, and blocks signage. The 311 reporting system for issues like potholes, flooding, or obstructions should be widely promoted and integrated into existing municipal apps and customer service portals. Maintenance guidelines should specifically account for newer infrastructure types, such as roundabouts, green paint treatments, and modular curbs or delineators, to ensure that materials are durable and repairable. Coordination between construction, maintenance, and repaving schedules is a proven strategy to reduce disruptions and extend pavement life, and Cupertino can adopt a “dig-once” approach to align upgrades with resurfacing or utility work. Regular inspections, performance audits, and a publicly accessible maintenance log can help ensure transparency, accountability, and timely repairs. Accessibility and Maintenance Sacramento, CA 46 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 46 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 8 Encouragement Encouragement programs help to create a lasting active transportation culture and can encourage overall mode share shifts. Table 2 provides an overview of existing and recommended walking and rolling encouragement programs. Table 2 Existing and Recommended Encouragement Programs Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples Existing Safe Routes to School (SR2S) The City should continue the existing Safe Routes to School Program and place greater emphasis on working with school districts to address on-site circulation and spillover traffic. Safety, Accessibility, and Fairness Cupertino SR2S Program Bike to Work/ Wherever Days The City can continue to sponsor Bike to Work/ Wherever Day events in support of regional efforts. Accessibility Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition BTWD Adopt-a-Trail Program The existing Santa Clara County program provides individuals, groups, businesses, and clubs the opportunity to adopt a section of trail on an annual basis. Each sponsor supports their Adopted Trail with financial contributions and volunteer trail work. Maintenance Santa Clara County Adopt-a-Trail Recommended Open Streets Open Street events promote and celebrate bicycling and walking and encourage participation from neighborhoods. Accessibility and Sustainability CicLAvia Social Walks/Rides Support City departments and local organizations in hosting social rides or walks, like Bike for Boba. Accessibility and Sustainability San José, CA Walking School Buses and Bike Trains [SR2S] Walking School Buses and Bike Trains are organized groups of students walking/biking to school under the supervision of a guardian, teacher, or adult volunteer. These groups follow predetermined routes and can operate on an occasional or daily basis, depending on the interest from families. Accessibility and Fairness Alameda County, CA Portland, OR 47 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 47 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 9 Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples Bike Parking Inventory Map existing racks in the City and upload them to the open data portal. Develop and publish a public-facing guide that outlines various types of secure micromobility parking infrastructure, such as bike corrals, covered racks, and lockers (like Oonee Pods). The guide should explain the ideal use cases for each option, based on factors such as location (e.g., transit hubs, business districts), user needs (e.g., long-term vs. short-term parking), and security levels. Including photos, technical specifications, and maintenance considerations will help the City, businesses, and community organizations make informed decisions about selecting and installing the right facilities. Accessibility, Maintenance, and Fairness APBP Essentials of Bike Parking Bike Rack Program Consider establishing a Bike Rack Installation Program to provide secure, convenient bicycle parking that supports everyday bicycling and reduces parking barriers. Accessibility Petaluma, CA Bicycle Parking at Large Events Revise Cupertino Municipal Code regarding event permits to include “Conditions for Issuance” to require events expected to draw more than 5,000 attendees must provide secure, attended bicycle parking for attendees at no charge. Accessibility Oakland, CA Electric Micromobility Expansion Cupertino has an opportunity to lead in sustainable transportation by developing a forward-thinking policy that actively encourages the use of electric micromobility devices—such as personal e-bikes, e- scooters, and other small electric vehicles—in line with state and regional standards. These devices make active transportation more accessible by extending travel distances, reducing trip times, and performing well in various weather conditions. This policy can define appropriate use on bike lanes, multi-use trails, and low-speed streets, with safe speed limits that prioritize both comfort and safety. The City can encourage electric micromobility use and discourage illegal devices and modifications through public education, safe riding guidance, and improved infrastructure, such as secure parking with charging options. Accessibility and Fairness Palo Alto, CA Santa Cruz, CA 48 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 48 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 10 Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples Trail Steward Volunteers Engage with volunteer organizations to regularly maintain and address community safety concerns around vegetation and debris on shared-use paths. Events can be opportunities for volunteers to help their community. Maintenance Richmond, CA Rails-to-Trails Maintenance Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Implementation Plan Develop a Transportation Demand Management Implementation Plan or Report to increase support for commuters bicycling or walking to work. This may include identifying additional metrics for businesses to count active transportation-supportive policies towards their own TDM plans and goals. Sustainability and Multimodal Balance Metropolitan Transportation Commission Walk and Roll Ambassadors Walk and Roll Ambassadors are trained community volunteers who promote safe walking and rolling, especially among students and families. They engage in outreach, education, and encouragement activities to foster active transportation and build a culture of mobility and safety. These roles are particularly important in communities where English is not the first language. Safety and Accessibility Bike East Bay Partner with Bicycle Organizations The formation of strong relationships with local bicycle advocates and bicycle clubs will encourage mutually beneficial collaboration and help the City reach its plan goals. The City is encouraged to partner with organizations in the area. Accessibility CalBike List of Local Partners Partner and Coordinate with County Agencies Coordinate with representatives from various County agencies, including County Public Health and VTA, for project and program implementation. Accessibility and Maintenance Santa Clara County, CA Bicycle Friendly Business Program Similar to the Bicycle Friendly Community designation, the Bicycle Friendly Business program recognizes businesses for their efforts to encourage a more bicycle-friendly atmosphere. This requires businesses to implement various strategies to cater to the diverse needs of customers and employees. The City of Cupertino Civic Center Plaza has Gold award status. Accessibility and Sustainability League of American Bicyclists 49 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 49 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 11 Education Walking and rolling education programs help individuals interested in active transportation feel more comfortable, safe, and confident navigating streets and shared-use paths. Table 3 outlines existing educational programs in the City as well as potential program expansion. Table 3 Existing and Recommended Education Programs Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples Existing Safe Routes to School (SR2S) The existing SR2S Program provides education and resources for school site administrators, parents, and children on bicycle safety, pedestrian awareness, and traffic concerns. Safety, Accessibility, and Fairness Cupertino SR2S Walking and Rolling Safety Campaign Create a City-sponsored outreach campaign to encourage all road users to abide by local laws and be courteous to other users. This campaign may be targeted at a single user type (e.g., cyclists) or at multiple users. Local stakeholders may assist in developing goals that are rooted in community concerns and issues. Campaigns should be deployed at regular intervals throughout the year to promote an attitude of safety awareness. Safety campaigns should be prioritized near schools, parks, transit stops, commercial areas, and at high collision corridors. Safety and Accessibility Cupertino Vision Zero PSA Campaign Bicycle Rodeos [SR2S] The City of Cupertino SR2S Program offers bicycle rodeo programming at Cupertino Unified schools, providing a blacktop training course on bicycle safety. Safety Cupertino SR2S Recommended “New Infrastructure” Education Campaign Often, when infrastructure changes occur, there is a missing education component to the community about how to interact with the new design or feature. Education materials and messaging can be developed during the installation of infrastructure, which the general public may be unfamiliar with, such as unique interchanges/roundabouts, two-stage turn boxes, or advisory shoulders. Safety and Multimodal Balance UC Davis 50 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 50 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 12 Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples Driver Education Program Establish a citywide driver education program that focuses on improving awareness and promoting safe interactions with people walking, biking, and rolling, incorporating best practices from Vision Zero and Safe Systems approaches. The program could include modules on recognizing vulnerable road users, crosswalk laws, yielding at intersections, safely passing cyclists, and navigating areas with high activity or limited visibility. The curriculum can be conducted in partnership with local school districts and SR2S coordinators. For older adults or existing drivers, collaborate with the DMV and community centers to offer targeted refresher workshops. The City can promote the program through strategic outreach campaigns—such as during Bike to Everywhere Month in May—using social media, public service announcements, and partnerships with local employers, transit agencies, and neighborhood associations. Additional outreach tools could include short educational videos, translated materials, and interactive online modules. Safety League of American Bicyclists Bicycle Safety Education for Adults Partner with local organizations to provide classes for adults to learn bicycle safety. Support growth by advertising and providing meeting space in Cupertino. Safety and Accessibility Sonoma County, CA Huntington Beach, CA Electric Micromobility Education With the proliferation of e-bikes and other electric micromobility devices, people may not understand or be misinformed about how to use these modes safely and legally. An education campaign can be targeted at e-mobility, especially among students who may be excited about the increased travel opportunities offered by such devices. Safety and Accessibility California Highway Patrol 51 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 51 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 13 Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples Waste Bin Placement Provide clear instructions on the City website and in utility bills about the proper placement of waste bins. Where on-street parking exists, bins should be placed near the curb, within the parking aisle. Residents should be instructed to place bins against the curb where no on-street parking exists to minimize intrusion into the bicycle lane. Collaborate with waste management companies to add reflective markings to waste bins to increase their visibility at night and reduce the risk of bicycle collisions with misplaced bins. The City could also work with management companies to stencil “Do Not Place In Bicycle Lane” on the waste bins to remind residents of proper placement. Maintenance and Multimodal Balance Pomona, CA Mini Main Street Education Events [SR2S] Host Mini Main Street safety education events and install permanent traffic gardens at select schools. Mini Main Streets and traffic gardens provide safe environments for children to practice roadway safety. Safety Mountain View, CA 52 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 52 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 14 Enforcement Enforcement programs help to institutionalize safe walking and rolling transportation systems. By prioritizing relationships between law enforcement and individuals who walk and roll, these programs help create a safe environment for all users. Table 4 below lists the proposed enforcement programs for the City. Table 4 Recommended Enforcement Programs Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples Recommended Traffic Ticket Reduction Help develop a partnership program with the Santa Clara County Sheriff and a bicycle education provider to offer bicycle education as a traffic court option. People who receive a citation/infraction on a bicycle for California Vehicle Code violations would be permitted to attend a Basic Street Skills class to reduce or waive fines. Safety and Fairness Marin County, CA Bike Patrol Program Partner with the County Sheriff to develop a program that provides routine patrolling on bicycles. The program would enable increased community engagement and promote bicycle safety. Safety and Fairness El Cerrito, CA Targeted Enforcement Target enforcement of vehicular violations at locations with a high incidence of red-light running and HIN/HII. Safety and Fairness San José, CA 53 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 53 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 15 Evaluation Programs to help evaluate and track progress toward reaching the Plan’s goals are essential for long-term success and effective project implementation. Table 5 lists proposed programs that help identify what’s working, what’s not working, and where additional efforts are needed following the completion of the plan. Table 5 Recommended Evaluation Programs Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples Existing Active Transportation Online Portal Update and maintain the GIS portal to display recent and ongoing active transportation project planning and status, as well as annual statistics on pedestrian and bicycle-involved collisions. This portal may also include links to other active transportation resources throughout the City. Safety and Accessibility Cupertino Open Data Portal Recommended School Walk Audit Reports [SR2S] Update reports with new safety assessments at each school to identify specific barriers and challenges faced by students who walk or roll to school and develop countermeasures to address the identified deficiencies. Safety Cupertino SR2S Annual Walking and Rolling Collision Reports Annual reviews of collisions involving vulnerable roadway users with the County Sheriff will help the City assess traffic safety issues and track progress towards a safer community for people walking and rolling. Safety San Francisco, CA Walking and Rolling Count Program (Manual and Automated) Conducting regular walking and rolling counts can help the City understand how travel behavior is changing over time. This would include manual and automated data collection. Manual counts are useful for capturing nuanced data (age, gender, helmet use, group sizes) and validating automated counters. This can be done in collaboration with universities, advocacy groups, or volunteers to expand manual count capacity. Automated counters (infrared, pneumatic tubes, LiDAR, video AI) provide long-term, high-frequency data and reduce staff time. The use of automated counting technology, such as in-ground sensors, infrared counters, or video analytics, can be integrated into ongoing signal maintenance and street Maintenance and Multimodal Balance Oakland, CA NCHRP Report 797 54 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 54 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 16 Policy/Program Description Plan Goal Examples improvement projects to minimize installation costs.1 When combined with models that predict where walking and bicycling would be expected, count data can also identify locations where people are expected to travel by these modes but do not, often due to a lack of infrastructure. Coordinate with regional planning and transit agencies and adjacent municipalities to ensure consistency in methodologies (e.g., same time periods, equipment calibration, and data formats) and include metadata on count conditions (e.g., weather, construction, events) for context. Walking and Rolling Count Program (Aggregated Data) To complement physical counters and enhance citywide data coverage, the City could purchase or subscribe to aggregate mobility datasets from companies like StreetLight Data and Replica, which provide insights derived from anonymized GPS, cellular, and location-based services data. These datasets can provide a broader understanding of walking and biking patterns, helping to identify underserved neighborhoods or emerging trends in travel behavior. Conduct regular validation of aggregated data against manually collected data. Safety, Maintenance, and Multimodal Balance San Francisco, CA 1 For example, the GridSmart SMARTMOUNT Bell Camera may be configured on existing poles at intersections to count people walking and rolling as they cross, with subscription to an additional software module. 55 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 55 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 17 Appendix: Existing Cupertino Policy Recommendations General Plan Mobility Element The City of Cupertino General Plan Mobility Element, adopted in 2015 and updated in 2024, outlines goals, policies, and strategies for transportation network improvements necessary to accommodate Cupertino's anticipated growth. The Element aims to make alternative modes of transportation attractive choices, helping to reduce strain on the automobile network and improve the health and quality of life for residents and businesses. Regional Coordination • Regional Transportation Planning: Participate in regional transportation planning processes to develop programs consistent with the goals and policies of Cupertino’s General Plan and to minimize adverse impacts on the City’s circulation system. Work with neighboring cities to address regional transportation and land use issues of mutual interest. • Citywide VMT Reduction: Framework for reducing VMT citywide includes limiting parking supply and implementing a citywide bikeshare program. • Regional Trail Development: Continue to plan and provide for a comprehensive system of trails and pathways consistent with regional systems, including the Bay Trail, Stevens Creek Corridor, and Ridge Trail. Complete Streets • Street Design: Adopt and maintain street design standards to optimize mobility for all transportation modes, including automobiles, walking, bicycling, and transit. • Adjacent Land Use: Design roadway alignments, lane widths, medians, parking and bicycle lanes, crosswalks, and sidewalks to complement adjacent land uses in keeping with the vision of the Planning Area. Strive to minimize adverse impacts and expand alternative transportation options for all Planning Areas (Special Areas and Neighborhoods). Improvement standards shall also consider the urban, suburban, and rural environments found within the City. • Connectivity: Promote pedestrian and bicycle improvements that improve connectivity between planning areas, neighborhoods and services, and foster a sense of community. • Community Impacts: Reduce traffic impacts and support alternative modes of transportation rather than constructing barriers to mobility. Do not close streets unless there is a demonstrated safety or overwhelming through-traffic problem and there are no acceptable alternatives, since street closures move the problem from one street to another. • Traffic Calming: Consider the implementation of best practices on streets to reduce speeds and make them user-friendly for alternative modes of transportation, including pedestrians and bicyclists. Walkability and Bikeability • Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan: Adopt and maintain a Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan that outlines policies and improvements to streets, the extension of trails, and pathways to create a safe way for people of all ages to bike and walk on a daily basis. • Pedestrian and Bicycle Crossings: Enhance pedestrian and bicycle crossings and pathways at key • locations across physical barriers such as creeks, highways, and road barriers. • Development: Require new development and redevelopment to increase connectivity through direct and safe pedestrian connections to public amenities, neighborhoods, and shopping and employment destinations throughout the city. • Street Widths: Preserve and enhance citywide pedestrian and bike connectivity by limiting street widening purely for automobiles as a means of improving traffic flow. • Curb Cuts: Minimize the number and width of driveway openings. 56 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 56 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 18 • Capital Improvement Program: Plan for improvements to pedestrian and bicycle facilities and eliminate gaps along the pedestrian and bicycle network as part of the City’s Capital Improvement Program. • Bicycle Parking: Require new development and redevelopment to provide public and private bicycle parking. • Outreach: Actively engage the community in promoting walking and bicycling through education, encouragement, and outreach on improvement projects and programs. • Spaces for Pedestrians: Require parking lots to include clearly defined paths for pedestrians, providing a safe route to building entrances. • Proactive Enforcement: Prioritize enforcement of traffic speeds and regulations on all streets with bike lanes, bike routes, and around schools. Transit • Access to Transit Services: Support right-of-way design and amenities consistent with local transit goals to improve transit as a viable alternative to driving. • Transit Facilities with new development: Work with VTA and/or major developments to ensure all new development projects include amenities to support public transit, including bus stop shelters, space for transit vehicles as appropriate, and attractive amenities such as trash receptacles, signage, seating, and lighting. • Vallco Shopping District Transfer Station: Work with VTA and/or other transportation service organizations to study and develop a transit transfer station that incorporates a hub for alternative transportation services such as car sharing, bike sharing, and/ or other services. Safe Routes to School • Safe Routes to School: Promote Safe Routes to Schools programs for all schools serving the city. • Prioritize Projects: Ensure that bicycle and pedestrian safety improvements include projects to enhance safe accessibility to schools. • Connections to Trails: Connect schools to the citywide trail system. • Education: Support education programs that promote safe walking and bicycling to schools. Transportation Impact Analysis • Protected Intersections: Consider adopting a Protected Intersection Policy, which would identify intersections where improvements would not be considered, which would degrade levels of service for non-vehicular modes of transportation. Potential locations include intersections in Priority Development Areas (PDAs) and other areas where non-vehicular transportation is a key consideration, such as near shopping districts, schools, parks, and senior citizen developments. Roadway System Efficiency • Street Width: Except as required by environmental review for new developments, limit widening of streets as a means of improving traffic efficiency and focus instead on operational improvements to preserve community character. Transportation Infrastructure • Transportation Improvement Plan: Develop and implement an updated citywide transportation improvement plan necessary to accommodate vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle transportation improvements to meet the City’s needs. • Multimodal Improvements: Integrate the financing, design, and construction of pedestrian and bicycle facilities with street projects. Build pedestrian and bicycle improvements at the same time as improvements for vehicular circulation to enable travelers to transition from one mode of transportation to another (e.g., bicycle to bus). 57 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 57 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 19 Bicycle Transportation Plan The 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan provided a vision and specific steps to create safer and more comfortable conditions for people to bike in Cupertino. The Plan included the following relevant recommended policies: • Policy 1.A.1: Support and expand the City of Cupertino Safe Routes to School program. • Policy 1.A.2: Partner with the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition to offer routine adult and family bicycle education classes in Cupertino. • Policy 1.B.1: Incorporate messaging in all City media that promotes the benefits of active lifestyles and raises awareness of walking and bicycling facilities in the community. • Policy 1.C.1: Partner with tourism and economic development agencies to promote Cupertino as a destination for active recreation and active lifestyles. • Policy 1.C.2: Create a Bicycle Friendly Business program to recognize and promote bicycle-friendly businesses in Cupertino. • Policy 1.C.3: Collaborate with county and regional partners to create bikeway connections to the local tourism generators and to promote active recreation in the region. • Policy 1.D.1: Work with Santa Clara County Sherriff’s Office to review collision locations and ‘close call’ reports and identify locations for increased enforcement of motorist and bicyclist behavior. • Policy 1.E.1: Review the Bicycle Transportation Plan performance measures at regular intervals to review progress and update priorities as necessary. • Policy 1.E.2: Conduct bicycle counts citywide at regular intervals to better understand the profile of residents bicycling in Cupertino as well as measure the impacts of newly implemented infrastructure and programs. • Policy 2.A.1: Annually review the number, locations, and contributing factors of bicycle-related collisions to identify and implement ongoing improvements at collision locations throughout the transportation network. • Policy 2.A.2: Identify opportunities to reduce bicyclist exposure by reducing locations or lengths of conflict areas with vehicles or by providing dedicated and separated facilities where feasible. • Policy 2.A.3: Adopt a Vision Zero policy to eliminate traffic fatalities by 2026. • Policy 2.A.4: Study the need for 15 mph School Zone speed limits and adopt in appropriate locations by 2020. • Policy 2.A.5: Develop a City policy for the regular documentation of bike facility quality and maintenance of bicycle facilities throughout the City. • Policy 3.A.1: Implement the recommendations from this Bicycle Transportation Plan Update. • Policy 3.A.2: Integrate bicycle facilities as part of the design and construction of upgrades or resurfacing of all existing roadways. • Policy 3.B.1: Create a low-stress network in parallel to the arterial bikeway network, providing an alternative that is appealing to residents of all ages and abilities. • Policy 3.B.2: Upgrade and improve the existing arterial bikeway network to increase bicyclist comfort and lower barriers for more risk-averse users. • Policy 3.B.3: Develop a citywide wayfinding system, providing access to appropriate locations such as employment centers, schools, and commercial centers. • Policy 3.B.4: Prioritize the installation of bicycle parking in the public right-of-way at key commercial and retail destinations. Pedestrian Transportation Plan The ensuing 2018 Pedestrian Transportation Plan provides a vision and specific steps for creating an inviting, safe, and connected pedestrian network. The plan establishes a framework for developing and maintaining pedestrian facilities and recommends policies, programs, and messaging to promote walking. That includes the following relevant recommended policies: Infrastructure and Operations 58 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 58 of 2882 Alta Planning + Design, Inc. City of Cupertino | 20 • Develop/adopt a Complete Streets Design Manual • Design standard speeds in pedestrian areas do not require a routine need for traffic calming • Adopt a Complete Streets internal checklist • Formalize traffic calming practices • Reconsider speed limit criteria • 15 mph zones near schools, parks, community facilities, or senior housing • Establish an accessible design checklist Evaluation and Planning • Include pedestrian and bicycle counts as a routine element of motor vehicle counts • Conduct pedestrian and bicycle counts for the planning/evaluation of the City's trail system Education and Enforcement • Continue promoting walking and biking through the SR2S program • Develop/implement targeted safety campaigns for other groups (adults, seniors, drivers) Project Implementation • Secure funding for broader education efforts • Continue to collaborate with related and adjacent agencies • Explore opportunities for improving coordination with major employers • Develop a line item in the CIP for implementation of the PTP Vision Zero Action Plan Finally, the 2024 Vision Zero Action Plan focused on broad strategies and actions aimed at eliminating severe injuries and fatalities on the City’s transportation network. Of particular note, it identified a High Injury Network (HIN) and a set of High Injury Intersections (HII) based on collision history. This set of HIN and HII areas should be priorities for targeted investment of many of the recommendations in this memo. Robust community engagement on this plan resulted in the following relevant recommended policies: • A.1 - Establish a Vision Zero Task Force • A.2 - Identify sustainable funding sources for a Vision Zero program • A.6 - Integrate Vision Zero safety principles into forthcoming City plans and design documents • A.8 - Continue monitoring existing speed limits on City streets in accordance with the changes made by AB 43 to further lower speeds • A.12 - Set up periodic pedestrian and cyclist counts at standardized locations • B.2 - Create a carefully ranked roster of extra safety projects • B.3 - Install quick, light, and adaptable projects proven to achieve real, tangible benefits (Quick-Build projects) • B.6 - Update signal timing plans to enhance safety for all modes of transportation, which may include adjustments to all-red intervals and pedestrian crossing times. • B.8 - Create an internal procedure for evaluating and implementing Vision Zero countermeasures on projects located within the HIN • B.9 - When identifying safety enhancements, ensure countermeasures align with the City's Complete Streets policy • D.1 - Implement the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan • D.2 - Prioritize pedestrian crossing improvements on the High Injury Network • D.3 - Complete projects that enhance bicycle and pedestrian safety at intersections with turning vehicles • D.4 - Develop and maintain an Active Transportation Plan • D.5 - Install high-visibility crosswalks in proximity to schools. • D.6 - Develop a comprehensive Safe Routes to Schools Plan 59 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 59 of 2882 Active Transportation Plan Impact Evaluation Guidelines Following the Council-approved initiation of any new Active Transportation Plan (ATP) project, and when parking or traﬃc impacts are identiﬁed during the preliminary engineering phase (30% design), staﬀ will return to the City Council to present the ﬁnal 30% design, identiﬁed impacts, and potential trade-oﬀs. At that meeting, the Council will determine whether the project should undergo a detailed impact analysis tailored to its speciﬁc impacts. This level of analysis requires a degree of design detail that is available only once the 30% design phase has been completed. The detailed impact analysis described in these guidelines is intentionally scheduled for this phase of a project because at this phase, the City is advancing a concept from the ATP into preliminary design. It does not approve ﬁnal plans or commit to construction. The purpose of this early design eﬀort is to translate a plan-level concept into a speciﬁc layout that deﬁnes lane conﬁgurations, parking, intersection control, and other geometric and operational details. A 30% level of design is necessary to evaluate traﬃc and parking impacts with technical accuracy because traﬃc analysis tools, such as Synchro, TransCAD, Cube, or Inrix- based models, require deﬁned lane assignments, turn pockets, signal phasing, parking layouts, and other project features not known prior to 30% design in order to produce meaningful estimates of delay, queues, diversion patterns, and parking utilization. By conducting a detailed analysis at the 30% phase, the City balances accuracy with ﬂexibility. A complete set of 30% design plans is suﬃcient for accurate modeling and is early enough in the design process to allow the Council to call for modiﬁcations or discontinue the project if the identiﬁed impacts are unacceptable. In addition, tying the analysis to the identiﬁcation of parking or traﬃc impacts at 30% ensures that funding is focused on projects where the preliminary design reveals meaningful operational or parking impacts, rather than expending signiﬁcant resources on every concept in the ATP, regardless of its risk proﬁle. Accordingly, if the Council requests an impact analysis following the 30% phase, then additional budget must be approved for the project’s Engineering Services Consultant to manage data collection and to evaluate the 30% design within the context of the City’s transportation network through traﬃc or parking analysis. 60 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 60 of 2882 The tasks below summarize the scope of what could potentially be required for project impact analysis. Following the completion of 30% design for impacted projects, the Consultant will prepare a cost estimate for transportation analysis, which will also be presented to the Council for consideration when the Council reviews the 30% plans. If Council supports this approach, staﬀ will incorporate this impact evaluation framework into the ﬁnal Active Transportation Plan as an internal policy that then applies to new ATP projects. The tasks below may not apply to all projects, but it is assumed that impact analysis would roughly equate to 10% of project construction costs. Task 1. Data Collection and Analysis Memorandum Cost: $5,000 - $10,000 Prepare a memorandum describing the proposed approach to data collection and analysis. The memo will list all relevant data to be collected based on the project’s determined impacts and document sources, formats, and methods. This could include signal phasing, vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle counts, an inventory of existing traﬃc control devices, or an inventory of parking supply. It will specify which transportation network or traﬃc operation elements, such as intersection delay, roadway segment operations, or parking, each dataset will support. The draft memorandum will be submitted to City staﬀ for review before initiating data collection. Task 2. Initial Data Collection Cost: $15,000 - $30,000 • Obtain commercially available origin–destination data, through providers such as StreetLight, Inrix, or Replica for the project area, including both peak periods. Collect turning-movement counts at project area intersections for both peak periods, including vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle volumes, right-turn-on-red movements, and initial queues at signalized intersections. • Conduct a ﬁeld visit of the project site and broader study area to verify existing and planned facilities identiﬁed in the data collection tasks, conﬁrm any facilities constructed since prior programming documents, and investigate unusual trends in traﬃc patterns. 61 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 61 of 2882 Task 3. Traﬃc Operations Analysis Cost: $20,000 - $40,000 • Document existing conditions based on collected counts and ﬁeld observations. Results will be summarized in narrative text, Level of Service (LOS) tables, ﬁgures visualizing lane conﬁgurations, traﬃc controls, and volumes, and supporting calculation outputs. If appropriate for evaluating the impacts of interest, speeds along the project area will be estimated and validated based on the City’s latest Engineering Traﬃc Survey, and queue lengths in dedicated turn lanes and through lanes between intersections under gridlock conditions will be evaluated. • Develop and reﬁne Synchro traﬃc models to represent Existing and Existing-Plus- Project conditions. The models will be used to identify any adverse or signiﬁcant impacts associated with the proposed project improvements. • Assess proposed intersection and corridor layouts for accessibility, including lane widths and turning radii, and identify opportunities for new or modiﬁed traﬃc control devices to support operations and safety. • Develop recommendations to address identiﬁed potential operational impacts. Task 4: Parking Impact Analysis (If needed) Cost: $5,000 - $15,000 • Prior to conducting a parking survey, develop a geodatabase of on-street parking supply along the project area. The database will count, by block face, the number of spaces, as well as all applicable parking regulations, such as permits. The initial inventory will rely on the City’s GIS database, aerial imagery, and street-level photography, then veriﬁed in the ﬁeld, and summarized in an exhibit that depicts curb conditions and the total existing parking supply. • Perform parking occupancy counts at 30-minute intervals by block face during typical weekday midday (noon–2:00 p.m.) and evening (8:00–10:00 p.m.) periods, and on a Saturday to represent weekend conditions. • Compare parking supply changes associated with the project design to observed parking demand to quantify the number of on-street spaces aﬀected. The analysis will include spaces in front of nearby properties within a 500-foot buﬀer of the 62 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 62 of 2882 aﬀected spaces to determine potential redistribution and broader neighborhood impacts. Task 5: Impact Report Cost: $5,000 - $10,000 The combined work will result in a set of ﬁndings and recommendations on speciﬁc traﬃc operations and parking impacts resulting from the project. The report will be used to inform potential further project development and frame public communications. The report will be evaluated by the City Council to assess the extent of the impacts and consider whether the project’s preliminary design should be modiﬁed to minimize the learned impacts or discontinued entirely. 63 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 63 of 2882 Project Eﬀectiveness Guidelines This memo describes the process for using data to measure the success of new projects recommended in the Active Transportation Plan (ATP), speciﬁcally for Class II, Class IIB, and Class IV bicycle facilities. The goal of this approach is to ensure that transportation projects developed by the ATP and completed through the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) successfully advance the City’s goals and priorities. The ATP supports two City policy priorities. These are traﬃc safety (Vision Zero Action Plan) and reducing greenhouse gas emissions (Climate Action Plan). The City’s Vision Zero Action Plan calls for eliminating serious and fatal collisions by 2040, and the Climate Action Plan seeks to reduce vehicle trips and their associated emissions in part by shifting short driving trips to walking, biking, and transit. To demonstrate progress toward these goals, staﬀ must track the number of people using new facilities and the safety of those facilities. This proposed data-driven evaluation approach will allow the City to answer basic but important questions, such as whether these projects encourage the use of active transportation modes, whether collision rates are decreasing even as ridership increases, and, potentially, which types of improvements deliver the greatest beneﬁts. The City does not currently own the counting technology needed to answer these questions on a citywide scale. Historically, staﬀ has relied on occasional spot counts or project-speciﬁc traﬃc studies, which provide only short snapshots of bicycle and pedestrian volumes. To fully measure the eﬀect of new ATP projects, staﬀ proposes establishing an approach that combines a one-time citywide baseline count eﬀort along with project-speciﬁc before-and-after counts for key bikeway projects. This will require the purchase or lease of bike-ped counting equipment and, potentially, the associated analytics software, so bicycle and pedestrian activity can be measured in a repeatable way. Staﬀ recommends that the ﬁrst action of the ATP should be to conduct a comprehensive baseline bicycle and pedestrian count at all ATP project locations across the City. This initial eﬀort would record how many people are currently biking (and walking, where feasible). The equipment could be repositioned over several weeks or months to cover all project locations within the ATP, providing the City with a clearer picture of existing conditions. 64 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 64 of 2882 For future Council-approved and initiated bikeway projects, staﬀ proposes a before- and-after evaluation for Class II, Class IIB, and Class IV bikeways. As a project moves into design, staﬀ will begin a data collection period at the project location to determine existing volumes. Counters would be deployed at a set of locations along the project limits to record bicycle activity on typical weekdays and weekends. At the same time, staﬀ would track reported collisions using Sheriﬀ reports and SWITRS. This establishes a clear pre-project picture of both ridership and safety. After the project is constructed and open to the public, and a suitable amount of time has passed to account for possible changes in transportation behavior, staﬀ will repeat this process during the post-project period, using the same locations and equipment to ensure comparable data. With these two datasets, staﬀ can calculate changes in average daily and peak-period bicycle volumes, as well as changes in collision rates. The key metric will not just be the number of collisions, but collisions relative to the number of bicyclists or pedestrians. A successful project will be one in which more people use the facility while the collision rate per rider remains the same or decreases. This will be referred to as the Safety Plus Mode Shift (SPMS) rate, which aligns with Vision Zero and Climate Action Plan objectives. To proceed with this approach, the City will need to either purchase equipment or contract for services. One option is to purchase a set of movable counters. This would involve an upfront capital cost but would give the City full control over how and when the equipment is deployed. This approach would also build internal expertise over time. Another option is to lease equipment or work with a contractor that provides turnkey services, including counter deployment, data processing, and reporting. This method would reduce the upfront cost and technical burden, but could be more expensive if used intensively over many years. A hybrid approach is also possible, in which the City purchases a small number of cameras for ongoing monitoring and supplements them with leased equipment or contractor services for larger, one-time eﬀorts such as the initial citywide baseline. Staﬀ envisions this work rolling out in phases. In the near term, following Council direction, staﬀ would reﬁne this evaluation approach, identify preferred equipment and procurement approaches, and bring forward a funding request. Once counters or services are secured, staﬀ will conduct the citywide baseline count at ATP priority project locations. As ATP individual projects advance, staﬀ will complete the one-year 65 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 65 of 2882 before-and-after evaluations and prepare project summaries for Council and the community that describe changes in volumes and safety. Ultimately, this data can be incorporated into public-facing tools such as dashboards or annual reports for residents to review projects. This approach is intended to improve transparency and accountability around active transportation projects. It gives Council a simple way to compare projects and project types, it allows designs to be reﬁned based on what works best in practice, and it creates a feedback loop between adopted policy goals and actual outcomes. By committing to this measurement approach, the City can signal that success is deﬁned not only by miles of bikeway delivered, but by quantiﬁable improvements in safety and mode shift toward sustainable transportation. If Council supports this approach, staﬀ will incorporate these guidelines into the ﬁnal ATP as an internal policy that then applies to new ATP projects. 66 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 66 of 2882 67 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 67 of 2882 68 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 68 of 2882 69 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 69 of 2882 70 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 70 of 2882 VI SUAL GL OS SA RY – BI KE FACI LITI ES Ro llin g Improvemen ts Shared-Use Path Paved paths shared by people walking and rolling completely separated from motor vehicle trac. Comfortable for people of all ages and abilities. Example: Regnart Creek Trail. Buered Bike Lane A conventional bike lane paired with a buer space that separates the bike lane from adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/ or parking lane. Example: Bollinger Rd. Neighborhood Bike Route Signed bike route, sharing the roadway with motor vehicles on quiet neighborhood streets. Includes signs, street markings, and substantial trac calming. Example: Price Ave. Separated Bikeway An on-street bike lane that is separated from motor vehicle trac by a vertical barrier such as bollards, raised medians, planters, or parked cars. Ex School. ample: Lawson Middle Bike Lane Dedicated lane for bicycle travel adjacent to trac. Separated from motor vehicle trac or parking by painted line. Example: Wolfe Rd. Most Separation Least Separation 71 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 71 of 2882 VISUA L GLOSSAR Y – PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES Walking Improvements Rectangular Rapid Flashin g Beacon Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacons (RRFBs) are a type of active warning beacon used at unsignalized crossings. They are designed to increase motor vehicle yielding compliance on multi-lane or high- volume roadways. Activated with a push-button. Leading Pedestrian Interval Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs) give a walk signal to pedestrian pedestrians to enter the crosswalk before drivers start moving, increasing pedestrian visibility to turning drivers. Advanced Stop/Yield Bar Advanced stop or yield bar markings are placed in advance of a crosswalk to discourage drivers from encroaching on the crosswalk. Median Refuge Islands Median refuge islands help improve access for people walking by increasing visibility and allowing pedestrians to cross one direction Curb Extensions Curb extensions minimize exposure for people crossing the street by shortening crossing distance and giving them a better chance to see and be seen before committing to crossing. Curb Ramp Curb ramps provide access between the sidewalk and roadway for people using wheelchairs, strollers, walkers, hand carts, bicycles, and for people who have trouble stepping up and down high curbs. In-Street Crossing Sign In-street crossing signs reinforce the driver requirement to yield the right of way to pedestrians at designated pedestrian crossing locations. Visibilit y Improvements crossing locations increases vehicle operators’ ability to see crosswalk and pedestrian users. High-Visibilit y Crosswalk High-visibility crosswalks are marked with thick bars, drawing additional attention and awareness to the crossing. In school zones, these crossings are yellow instead of the standard white color. Pedestrian crossing improvements were classiﬁed into three groups. Each of these groups represents a “basket” of options, some of which may be considered for use at each location shown in the pedestrian recommendations map. Typologies will be applied to intersections on a case-by-case basis based on City engineering judgment. Group A—Crossing Improvements Group B—Geometric Cha nges Group C—Trac Control Improvements 72 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 72 of 2882 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item Subject: Proclamation in recognition of April as Donate Life Month. Present proclamation recognizing April as Donate Life Month. CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 4/3/2026Page 1 of 1 73 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 73 of 2882 74 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 74 of 2882 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item Subject: Proclamation in recognition of April as Fair Housing Month. Present proclamation recognizing April as Fair Housing Month. CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 4/3/2026Page 1 of 1 75 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 75 of 2882 76 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 76 of 2882 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item Subject: Approval of February 28, 2026 City Council meeting minutes. Approve the February 28, 2026 City Council meeting minutes. CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 4/3/2026Page 1 of 1 77 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 77 of 2882 DRAFT MINUTES CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL Saturday, February 28, 2026 SPECIAL MEETING At 9:34 a.m., Mayor Kitty Moore called the Special City Council Meeting to order in the Creekside Park Building, 10455 Miller Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014 and via Teleconference. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Kitty Moore, Vice Mayor Liang Chao, and Councilmembers J.R. Fruen, Sheila Mohan, and R “Ray” Wang. Absent: None. COUNCIL WORKSHOP 1. Subject: City Council Governance and Strategic Planning Workshop. Recommended Action: Receive and discuss presentation regarding City Council Governance and Strategic Planning. Written communications for this item included consultant presentations, Attributes of Exceptional Councils Article, and A Key Ingredient for Success: An Effective City Council/City Manager Relationship Article. Mayor Moore opened the public comment period and the following members of the public spoke. Cathy Helgerson Mayor Moore closed the public comment period. Consultant Kevin Duggan gave a presentation on Key Strategies for High Functioning City Councils & Staff. Councilmembers asked questions and made comments. 78 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 78 of 2882 City Council Minutes February 28, 2026 Page 2 Council discussed the following workshop themes: • Relationships and Governance Culture: Interactions between councilmembers, staff, and commissions affect overall effectiveness. Teamwork and positive relationships support outcomes and maintain a strong workplace culture. • Complexity of the Council Role: Operating under competing community perspectives, public perception, limited resources, and the need to function as a team despite not choosing one another. • Constructive Conflict and Trust: Disagreement is valuable when focused on ideas but becomes counterproductive if it turns personal. Mutual trust and respect are essential for collaboration and effective decision-making. • Governance Focus: The need to transition from campaign-oriented behavior to governance-focused actions, including collaboration, coalition building, problem-solving, and influencing one another through credibility and engagement. • Communication and Frameworks: The Brown Act restricts collective deliberation outside of noticed meetings but does not prevent appropriate one-on-one dialogue. Governance tools, such as codes of conduct, are most effective when guiding professional behavior rather than enforcing discipline. • Accountability, Public Engagement, and Resilience: Balancing accountability and collaboration while encouraging improvement rather than conflict. Noted the impact of public comment and external pressures, the importance of distinguishing highly active individuals from the broader community, and the need to maintain focus on governance responsibilities. Trust-building and resilience in the face of criticism and differing views are essential to effective public service. The following items were captured on flip charts by Councilmembers during the workshop discussion. From Fellow Council Members Councilmembers identified the following key needs to support their work together: • Accessibility for Council meetings • Honest and constructive dialogue • Ability to listen and appreciate differing positions • Avoiding political or personal attacks • Supporting the Chair and meeting structure 79 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 79 of 2882 City Council Minutes February 28, 2026 Page 3 • Respect and focus on agenda topics • Mutual respect for priorities and working styles • Using prep sessions effectively and asking questions in advance • Supporting efficient and well-run meetings • Awareness of Council/Manager form of government From City Manager/Staff to Get Jobs Done Councilmembers noted that staff support is most effective when it provides: • No surprises and respect for Council process • Accountability and prioritization of residents’ needs • Responsiveness to the public • Equal access and fair treatment of all members of the public • Trust in staff expertise • Total Quality Management (TQM) to find improvement, not assign blame • Responsiveness to informational memos Staff Needs from Council Councilmembers identified the following supports as important to help staff get the work done: • Respect for their time, expertise, and efforts • Clear understanding of Council direction • No surprises in requests or decisions • Appreciation of staff work • Early submission of questions to allow preparation Council consented to bring back Kevin Duggan for a follow-up workshop session to continue the discussion but using a more interactive, scenario-based format. Mayor Moore recessed the meeting at 11:12 a.m. The meeting reconvened at 11:21 a.m. with all Councilmembers present. City Manager Tina Kapoor introduced the item and discussed the development of the City’s Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan is a high-level governance tool intended to align Council and staff, provide clarity and shared expectations, and guide how key City functions operate together, including the budget, Capital Improvement Program (CIP), and City Work Program. Consultant Drew Corbett gave a presentation on the City’s Strategic Planning framework. Council discussion focused on the following: • City’s strategic planning framework and proposed updates to the City Work Program (CWP) process 80 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 80 of 2882 City Council Minutes February 28, 2026 Page 4 • Council-adopted two-year strategic vision framework from March 2025, including six Council goals and three focus areas guiding the current two-year work program • Proposed two-year cycle with milestones, including mid-cycle updates, post- election priority setting, and alignment with budget development • Process for modifying the framework with timelines and deliverables • Alignment of the CWP with the operating budget and five-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Councilmembers asked questions and made comments, including: • Limited completion of work program items relative to the total number of items • How mid-cycle adjustments account for incomplete items • Whether the current number of items is realistic given available resources • More structured prioritization framework, including categorization into essential services, priorities, and lower-priority items • Potential use AI tools to improve efficiency and decision-making. • Relationship between the work program and broader operations, noting that the work program reflects only part of ongoing activities and may not capture all operational workload or emerging issues • Need for clearer prioritization, better alignment with operational demands, and more transparent reporting of completed and ongoing work Staff will bring refinements to the strategic planning framework back to Council for further consideration. ADJOURNMENT At 12:16 p.m., Mayor Kitty Moore adjourned the Special City Council Meeting. Minutes prepared by: __________________________________ Kirsten Squarcia, Recording Secretary 81 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 81 of 2882 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item Subject: Approval of March 17, 2026 City Council meeting minutes. Approve the March 17, 2026 City Council meeting minutes. CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 4/3/2026Page 1 of 1 82 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 82 of 2882 DRAFT MINUTES CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, March 17, 2026 SPECIAL MEETING At 5:45 p.m., Mayor Moore called the Special City Council Meeting to order in the Cupertino Community Hall Council Chamber, 10350 Torre Avenue and via teleconference. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Kitty Moore, Vice Mayor Liang Chao, and Councilmembers J.R. Fruen, and Sheila Mohan. Absent: Councilmember R “Ray” Wang. STUDY SESSION 1. Subject: Study Session on the Housing Development Project at 10333 N. Wolfe Road. Recommended Action: Receive Santa Clara County staff’s presentation and provide feedback on the project. Written communications for this item included emails to Council, supplemental report and presentation from Santa Clara County. Consuelo Hernandez, Deputy County Executive for the County of Santa Clara; Andrea Osgood, Chief of Real Estate Development and Executive Vice President of Eden Housing; and Sarah Vaccaro, Principal Architect at Architects FORA, gave a joint presentation. Mayor Moore opened the public comment period and the following members of the public spoke: Jennifer Griffin Cory Wolbach, representing Silicon Valley at Home Peggy Griffin Stuart Chessen Pamela Hershey 83 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 83 of 2882 March 17, 2026 City Council Minutes Page 2 Housing Commissioner Connie Cunningham (representing self) Alex Shoor, representing Catalyze SV Jean Bedord Venkat Ranganathan Louise Saadati Mayor Moore closed the public comment period. Councilmembers asked questions and made comments. Council received the presentation from Santa Clara County staff on the Housing Development Project at 10333 N. Wolfe Road. ADJOURNMENT At 6:41 p.m., Mayor Kitty Moore adjourned the Special City Council Meeting. REGULAR MEETING At 6:47 p.m., Mayor Moore called the Regular City Council Meeting to order in the Cupertino Community Hall Council Chamber, 10350 Torre Avenue and via teleconference; and Teleconference Location Pursuant to Gov. Code 54953(b)(2): The Rosewood Hotel, Lobby, 2825 Sand Hill Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Kitty Moore, Vice Mayor Liang Chao, and Councilmembers J.R. Fruen, Sheila Mohan, and R “Ray” Wang (participated virtually). Councilmember Wang confirmed that he was in the noticed public location, that he had posted the notice of the meeting at his remote location and that no other individuals over the age of 18 were with him and that no one had indicated to him that they were intending to make public comment or address the Council. CLOSED SESSION REPORT – None. CEREMONIAL ITEMS – None. POSTPONEMENTS AND ORDERS OF THE DAY MOTION: Moore moved and Mohan seconded to continue Item No. 12, to a special City Council 84 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 84 of 2882 March 17, 2026 City Council Minutes Page 3 meeting on April 1, 2026, at 6:30 p.m. The motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Moore, Chao, Fruen, Mohan and Wang. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Written communications for this item included emails to the Council. The following members of the public spoke: Jennifer Griffin discussed Highway 17 traffic safety and Senate Bill (SB) 330 and loss of retail. Sayareh Farsio (representing group) discussed truck noise from Lehigh Quarry. At 7:01 p.m., Councilmember Wang left the meeting. Veronica Lentfer (representing group) discussed housing evacuation safety. Peggy Griffin discussed Below Market Rate (BMR) housing, public health and safety, and truck traffic noise. Ying Sosic discussed the use of rat poison. Rhoda Fry discussed evacuation safety, Lehigh traffic, and Planning Commission and City Council agenda packets. Planning Commissioner San Rao (representing self) discussed County Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR), Health Center, Sheriff's budget, Foothill Multimodal Study, and quarry. Planning Commissioner Tracy Kosolcharoen (representing self) (virtually) discussed an evacuation study and Assembly Bill (AB) 130. Vikram Saxena (virtually) discussed fire safety and code compliance, architectural and site plan documentation and a technical study. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 1-9) Mayor Moore opened the public comment period and the following members of the public spoke: Peggy Griffin (Item 4) 85 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 85 of 2882 March 17, 2026 City Council Minutes Page 4 Mayor Moore closed the public comment period. MOTION: Mohan moved and Chao seconded to approve Consent Calendar Items 1-9. The motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Moore, Chao, Fruen, and Mohan. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: Wang. 1. Subject: Approval of February 24, 2026 City Council meeting minutes Recommended Action: Approve the February 24, 2026 City Council meeting minutes 2. Subject: Approval of March 3, 2026 City Council meeting minutes Recommended Action: Approve the March 3, 2026 City Council meeting minutes 3. Subject: Ratifying Accounts Payable for the periods ending February 13, 2026, and February 27, 2026 Recommended Action: A. Adopt Resolution No. 26-027 ratifying Accounts Payable for the Period ending February 13, 2026; and B. Adopt Resolution No. 26-028 ratifying Accounts Payable for the Period ending February 27, 2026 4. Subject: Review of Future agenda items requested by City Councilmembers (“TBD List”). Recommended Action: Review the TBD list and accept the staff recommendations for all items. 5. Subject: Award of Agreement to Tyler Technologies, Inc., for the two-year implementation of a new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system in the amount of $1,785,144, along with three additional years of SaaS maintenance and support totaling $775,956, for a not-to-exceed total of $2,561,100; Authorize the City Manager to extend the Contract annually for up to five additional years at an annual escalation rate of 3%, for a total not-to-exceed of $1,424,907, provided pricing and services remain acceptable. Recommended Action: 1. Approve a five-year agreement with Tyler Technologies, Inc., for the Tyler ERP system for a total not-to-exceed amount of $2,561,100; 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the Contract with Tyler Technologies when all conditions have been met; and 3. Authorize the City Manager to extend the Contract annually for up to five additional years at an annual escalation rate of 3%, for a total not-to-exceed of $1,424,907, provided pricing and services remain acceptable. Written communications for this item included a supplemental report. 6. Subject: Approval of a fifth amendment to Granicus, LLC., to renew Enterprise Government Experience Cloud Services subscription for $578,626 plus a contingency of 86 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 86 of 2882 March 17, 2026 City Council Minutes Page 5 $57,863 over three years, for a not-to-exceed amount of $636,489. Recommended Action: Authorize the City Manager to execute the Fifth Amendment to the agreement with Granicus, LLC., to renew Enterprise Government Experience Cloud Services subscription for a three-year not-to-exceed amount of $636,489, within the total not-to-exceed agreement amount of $1,334,026. 7. Subject: 2025 General Plan and Housing Element Annual Progress Report. Recommended Action: Receive the General Plan and Housing Element Annual Progress Report for the 2025 Reporting Year (Attachments A, B, and C). 8. Subject: Award a construction contract for roofing system repairs at Quinlan Community Center and Sports Center to Roofing & Solar Construction, Inc. in the amount of $650,000; Authorization of construction contingency amount of $65,000 (10%) for a total contract amount of $715,000. Recommended Action: 1. Approve the award of construction contract for the Sports Center and Quinlan Community Center Roofing System Replacement Project in the amount of $650,000 to Roofing & Solar Construction, Inc.; 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the construction contract when all conditions have been met; and 3. Authorize the Director of Public Works to execute any necessary change orders up to a construction contingency amount of $65,000 (10%) for a total contract amount of $715,000. 9. Subject: Award a construction contract for the 2025 Concrete Reconstruction Project to Villalobos & Associates, Inc. for removal and replacement of concrete curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and pedestrian ramps in the amount of $1,105,202.14; Authorize construction contingency to allow for unforeseen conditions in the amount of $110,520.21 (10%) for a total contract amount of $1,215,722.35. Recommended Action: 1. Award a construction contract for the 2025 Concrete Reconstruction Project (project number 2025-103) in the amount of $1,105,202.14 to Villalobos & Associates, Inc.; 2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the construction contract when all conditions have been met; and 3. Authorize the Director of Public Works to execute any necessary change orders up to a construction contingency amount of $110,520.21 (10%) for a total contract amount of $1,215,722.35. ACTION CALENDAR 10. Subject: Follow-Up Analysis of Potential Revenue Ballot Measure Options (Continued on February 19, 2026) 87 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 87 of 2882 March 17, 2026 City Council Minutes Page 6 Recommended Action: Receive the follow-up analysis regarding potential revenue ballot measure options and provide direction to staff regarding further evaluation or pursuit of tax ballot measures for potential revenue measures, including business license tax restructuring, Utility Users Tax considerations, and local sales tax options. Written communications for this item included emails to the Council and staff presentation. Acting Director of Administrative Services Jonathan Orozco gave a presentation. Councilmembers asked questions and made comments. Mayor Moore opened the public comment period and the following members of the public spoke: Peggy Griffin Rhoda Fry Planning Commissioner San Rao (representing self) (virtually) Bicycle Pedestrian Commissioner Muni Madhdhipatla (representing self) (virtually) Senior Advisor Ken Duran with HDL answered questions. Mayor Moore closed the public comment period. Moore moved Chao seconded to direct staff to conduct polling for the Utility Users Tax (UUT) at the current rate, with a potential slight increase, with some modernization of the services included, and add a brief question about parkland ballot measure. The motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Moore, Chao, Fruen, and Mohan. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: Wang. At 8:29 p.m., Mayor Moore recessed the meeting. The meeting reconvened at 8:36 p.m. with all Councilmembers present (Wang absent). 11. Subject: Blesch Property Study on Opportunities for Optimal Use Recommended Action: Receive the presentation and accept staff recommendation or other available options on the future use of the property: 1. Direct staff to further evaluate concepts and costs associated with demolition of the existing structure and initiate planning for conversion of the property to passive park and recreation uses, with no new building structures and minimal grading to avoid floodway impacts (staff recommendation); 2. Modify the Scope of Park Improvements; or 3. Retain the Existing Structure; or 88 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 88 of 2882 March 17, 2026 City Council Minutes Page 7 4. Build a New Structure; or 5. Defer Action. Written communications for this item included emails to the Council and staff presentation. Director of Public Works Chad Mosley gave a presentation. Councilmembers asked questions and made comments. Mayor Moore opened the public comment period and the following members of the public spoke: Jennifer Griffin Parks and Recreation Commissioner and Economic Development Committee Member Claudio Bono (representing self) Rhoda Fry Danessa Techmanski (virtually) Planning Commissioner San Rao (representing self) (virtually) Councilmembers asked questions and made comments. Mayor Moore closed the public comment period. MOTION: Moore moved and Chao seconded the staff recommendation, Option 1, with an amendment to convert to a park with native plantings, remove the structure and return it to nature, and include some pathways that are safely away from the street, with the slope down from Stevens Creek Boulevard. FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Fruen made a friendly amendment to coordinate with the Historical Society first before moving forward. (Moore and Chao did not accept this friendly amendment and it was not included in the motion) FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Chao made a friendly amendment to add outdoor seating (Moore accepted the friendly amendment) FRIENDLY AMENDMENT: Chao made a friendly amendment to exclude a labyrinth (Moore accepted the friendly amendment) The amended motion passed with the following vote: Ayes: Moore, Chao, Fruen, and Mohan. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: Wang. 89 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 89 of 2882 March 17, 2026 City Council Minutes Page 8 PUBLIC HEARINGS 12. Subject: Consider a Tentative Map, Architectural and Site Approval, and Tree Removal Permit for the construction of a 51-unit townhome condominium development on Housing Element Priority Housing Sites 25 through 28. The project utilizes Senate Bill 330 and provisions of State Density Bonus law. (Application No(s): TM-2024-009, ASA-2024-015, TR-2024-044; Applicant: SummerHill Homes, LLC; Location: 10857, 10867, 10877, and 10887 Linda Vista Drive; APNs: 356-06-001, -002, -003, and -004). Recommended Action: 1. Find the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); 2. Make the required findings of No Net Loss (SB 166); and 3. Approve the following permits: a. Adopt Resolution No. 26-029 approving Tentative Final Map (TM-2024-009) (Attachment A); b. Adopt Resolution No. 26-030 approving Architectural & Site Approval Permit (ASA-2024-015) (Attachment B); and c. Adopt Resolution No. 26-031 approving Tree Removal Permit (TR-2024-044) (Attachment C). Written communications for this item included emails to the Council, staff presentation, supplemental report, and Attachment U - Plan set. As noted under Postponements and Orders of the Day, this item was continued to a special City Council meeting on April 1, 2026, at 6:30 p.m. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR – None CITY MANAGER REPORT 13. Subject: City Manager Report City Manager Tina Kapoor included the City Manager Newsletter, which includes recent highlights and upcoming events as provided in the published agenda. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - CONTINUED – None. COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS 14. Subject: Councilmember Reports 90 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 90 of 2882 March 17, 2026 City Council Minutes Page 9 Councilmembers included reports on their various committees and events as provided in the published agenda. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS There were no requests from Councilmembers for future agenda items. 15. Subject: Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report A tentative council meeting agenda calendar was provided in the published agenda. ADJOURNMENT At 9:12 p.m., Mayor Kitty Moore adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting. Minutes prepared by: ________________________________ Lauren Sapudar, City Clerk 91 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 91 of 2882 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item Subject:Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for February 2026. Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for February 2026. CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 4/3/2026Page 1 of 1 92 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 92 of 2882 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3220 CUPERTINO.GOV 1 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Date: April 7, 2026 Subject Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for February 2026 Recommended Action Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for February 2026 Reasons for Recommendation The Monthly Investment Report is a routine report provided to City Council and is provided as Attachment A with this report. Sustainability Impact No sustainability impact. Fiscal Impact No fiscal impact. City Work Program Item/Description None. Council Goal Fiscal Strategy California Environmental Quality Act Not applicable. _____________________________________ Prepared by: Jonathan Orozco, Acting Director of Administrative Services and City Treasurer Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager Attachments: A – Chandler Investment Report February 2026 93 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 93 of 2882 INVESTMENT REPORT City of Cupertino | As of February 28, 2026 CHANDLER ASSET MANAGEMENT | chandlerasset.com Chandler Team: For questions about your account, please call (800) 317-4747, or contact clientservice@chandlerasset.com Information contained herein is confidential. We urge you to compare this statement to the one you receive from your qualified custodian. Please see Important Disclosures at the end of the statement.94 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 94 of 2882 TABLE OF CONTENTS ECONOMIC UPDATE ACCOUNT PROFILE CONSOLIDATED INFORMATION PORTFOLIO HOLDINGS TRANSACTIONS 1 95 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 95 of 2882 ECONOMIC UPDATE 2 96 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 96 of 2882 ▪ ▪ ▪ Recent economic data has signaled moderating inflation alongside a continued rebalancing in labor market conditions. Price pressures continues to run modestly above the Federal Reserve’s longer‑run objective, while the unemployment rate dropped to 4.3%.As the data flow normalizes, the Chandler team anticipates additional yield curve steepening as the Federal Reserve gradually guides the policy rate toward a more neutral range. One additional 25 basis point rate cut may come in the first half of 2026,while U.S. trade and fiscal policy continue to represent important sources of elevated market uncertainty. The Federal Reserve’s January Federal Open Market Committee meeting concluded with policymakers leaving the target range unchanged at 3.50%–3.75%after three consecutive 25‑basis‑point cuts at the end of 2025.However, officials remain divided on the appropriate path forward, with Governors Christopher Waller and Stephen Miran dissenting in favor of an additional reduction. The future policy regime also began to take shape as President Trump announced Kevin Warsh as his nominee for the next Federal Reserve Chair. The US Treasury yield curve flattened in February,as the 2-year Treasury yield fell 15 basis points to 3.38%, the 5-year Treasury was down 29 basis points to 3.50%, and the 10-year Treasury yield was 30 basis points lower at 3.94%. The spread between the 2-year and 10-year Treasury yield points on the curve was 15 basis points tighter from January at +56 basis points at February month-end. The spread between the 2-year Treasury and 10-year Treasury yield one year ago was +22 basis points. The spread between the 3-month and 10-year Treasury yield points on the curve was +28 basis points in February versus +58 basis points in January. ECONOMIC UPDATE 3 97 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 97 of 2882 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 MO M C h a n g e I n T h o u s a n d s ( 0 0 0 ' s ) Nonfarm Payroll (000's) Non-farm Payroll (000's) 3-month average (000's) 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% Unemployment Rate Underemployment Rate (U6) Unemployment Rate (U3) Ra t e ( % ) The February Nonfarm Payrolls report showed an unexpected decline of 92,000 jobs, contrasting with expectations for a 55,000 increase. The loss partly reflected a month-long strike involving more than 30,000 Kaiser Permanente employees, while severe winter weather further weighed on hiring. Even so, payroll declines were broad-based across several industries. The unemployment rate rose to 4.4%in February, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The unexpectedly weak jobs report may prompt renewed concerns about the labor market’s recent stability. Source: US Department of Labor Source: US Department of Labor EMPLOYMENT 4 98 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 98 of 2882 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 Job Openings Recession Historical Average In T h o u s a n d s ( 0 0 0 ' s ) The Labor Department’s Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) reported that job openings fell to 6.5 million in December, reducing the ratio of openings to unemployed workers to 0.9—the lowest level since the peak in early 2022.The decline in vacancies, coupled with slower hiring, indicates a continued softening in labor demand, even as employers remain reluctant to cut staff. Layoffs and discharges rose in the transportation, utilities, and warehousing sectors but declined in finance and insurance. Source: US Department of Labor JOB OPENINGS & LABOR TURNOVER SURVEY 5 99 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 99 of 2882 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% 10.0% Consumer Price Index (CPI) CPI YOY % Change Core CPI YOY % Change YO Y ( % ) C h a n g e 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) PCE Price Deflator YOY % Change PCE Core Deflator YOY % Change Fed Target YO Y ( % ) C h a n g e Headline inflation moderated in January with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rising 0.2% for the month, down from 0.3%in December.On an annual basis, headline CPI eased to 2.4% from 2.7% a year earlier. Core CPI, which excludes volatile food and energy prices, edged up to 0.3%in January from 0.2% the previous month, while the annual rate eased slightly to 2.5% from 2.6%. The Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) Index for December, released on February 20,showed both headline and core inflation rising 0.4%, which was 0.1% higher than expectations. On an annual basis, headline PCE inflation advanced 2.9% and Core PCE, which excludes food and energy, rose 3.0% in December. Source: US Department of Labor Source: US Department of Commerce INFLATION 6 100 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 100 of 2882 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% Retail Sales YOY % Change YO Y ( % ) C h a n g e The Conference Board’s Consumer Confidence Index rose to 91.2 in February from an upwardly revised 89.0 in January. Confidence improved amid signs of labor market stability and moderating inflation. However, the survey noted an increase in respondents citing concerns about the overall cost of goods as well as political and trade uncertainties. Retail sales edged down 0.2%in January from December, driven by a decline in vehicle sales,but were up 3.2%on a seasonally adjusted annual basis. The control group measure, which feeds directly into GDP calculations, rose 0.3% from the prior month, matching expectations. Adverse winter weather continued to restrain retail activity during the month. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 In d e x L e v e l Consumer Confidence Recession Source: US Department of Commerce Source: The Conference Board All time high is 144.70 (1/31/00); All time low is 25.30 (2/28/09) CONSUMER 7 101 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 101 of 2882 -25.0% -20.0% -15.0% -10.0% -5.0% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% Leading Economic Indicators (LEI) Recession YO Y (% ) C h a n g e -1.00 -0.75 -0.50 -0.25 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 Chicago Fed National Activity Index (CFNAI) Recession 3 M o n t h A v e r a g e The Chicago Fed National Activity Index (CFNAI) rose to 0.18 in January, indicating that U.S. economic activity expanded above its historical trend, following a -0.21 reading in December. The Chicago Fed reported that all four broad categories of indicators used to construct the index improved from the prior month.As a result, the index’s three‑month moving average increased to -0.06,up from -0.29 in December. A zero value for the CFNAI corresponds to economic growth at the historical average rate. The Conference Board’s Leading Economic Index (LEI) declined 0.2%in December, marking its fifth consecutive monthly decrease after a 0.3% drop in November.On a year-over-year basis, the index fell 3.9%. According to the Conference Board, persistently weak consumer expectations followed by new orders were the leading negative contributors. Overall, the LEI continues to signal slower economic growth into 2026. Source: The Conference Board Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago LEADING INDICATORS OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITY 8 102 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 102 of 2882 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 2,200 2,400 In T h o u s a n d s o f U n i t s Annualized Housing Starts Multi Family Housing Starts Single Family Housing Starts The December S&P Cotality Case‑Shiller 20‑City Composite Home Price Index posted a 1.3% year‑over‑year gain in 2025 on a non‑seasonally adjusted basis—the weakest annual increase since 2011.Notably, inflation outpaced home price appreciation in the second half of the year, ending a 10-year trend of positive real returns. Housing starts increased 6.2%to an annualized rate of 1,404,000 in December adding 981 thousand single-family home starts and 402 thousand multifamily home starts. Meanwhile, the Freddie Mac 30‑year fixed mortgage rate continued to edge lower, reaching 5.98% by the end of February. Source: US Department of Commerce Source: S&P -20.0% -16.0% -12.0% -8.0% -4.0% 0.0% 4.0% 8.0% 12.0% 16.0% 20.0% 24.0% S&P/Case-Shiller 20 City Composite Home Price Index Recession YO Y ( % ) C h a n g e HOUSING 9 103 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 103 of 2882 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 Institute of Supply Management (ISM) Surveys ISM Manufacturing ISM Services EXPANDING CONTRACTING The Institute for Supply Management’s (ISM) Manufacturing and Services Indexes both signaled expansion in February. The ISM Manufacturing Index rose to 52.4, marking a second consecutive month of growth following contractions in nearly all of the prior 40 months. The ISM Services Index increased to 56.1, its 20th straight month in expansion territory and the fastest pace since mid-2022. With both measures remaining above the 50 threshold for a second consecutive month, ISM data point to a solid start for the U.S. economy in 2026.(Readings above 50 indicate expansion, while those below 50 reflect contraction.) Source: Institute for Supply Management SURVEY BASED MEASURES 10 104 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 104 of 2882 Components of GDP 3/25 6/25 9/25 12/25 0.4% 1.7% 2.3% 1.6% 3.8% -2.7% 0.0% 0.7% -4.7% 4.8% 1.6% 0.1% -0.4% -0.4% 0.2% -1.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% -0.6% 3.8% 4.4% 1.4% State and Local (Consumption and Gross Investment) Personal Consumption Expenditures Gross Private Domestic Investment Net Exports and Imports Federal Government Expenditures Total -10.0% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% Gross Domestic Product (GDP) GDP QOQ % Change GDP YOY % Change Source: US Department of Commerce Source: US Department of Commerce The advanced estimate for real gross domestic product (Real GDP) decelerated to 1.4%in the fourth quarter. The deceleration from 4.4%in the third quarter reflects downturns in government spending, exports, and slower consumer spending. The consensus projection calls for 2.3% growth in the first quarter and 2.5% for the full year 2026. GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT (GDP) 11 105 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 105 of 2882 Source: Federal Reserve Source: Bloomberg 0 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 5,000,000 6,000,000 7,000,000 8,000,000 9,000,000 10,000,000 Federal Reserve Balance Sheet Assets Recession In $ m i l l i o n s The Federal Reserve left its benchmark interest rate unchanged in January, keeping the target range at 3.50%to 3.75% after the December quarter‑point cut that was justified by signs of softening in the labor market. Policymakers maintained a cautious tone, acknowledging that inflation has continued to moderate but emphasizing that the outlook remains uncertain and that future adjustments will depend on incoming data. The Fed minutes, released in February, indicated several participants would have supported ‘two-sided’language on the go forward rate path, implying some possibility the next move by the FOMC could be an increase in the Fed Funds rate. The Committee also reaffirmed its December decision to halt balance sheet runoff and to reinvest principal and interest payments from its securities holdings, signaling a desire to maintain ample reserves and support orderly market functioning while it assesses the effects of earlier tightening and recent rate cuts. FEDERAL RESERVE 0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% Effective Federal Funds Rate Recession Yi e l d ( % ) 12 106 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 106 of 2882 Source: Bloomberg Source: Bloomberg 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% US Treasury Note Yields 2-Year 5-Year 10-Year Yi e l d ( % ) 0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0% 4.5% 5.0% US Treasury Yield Curve Feb-26 Nov-25 Feb-25 Yi e l d ( % ) At the end of February, the 2-year yield was 61 basis points lower, and the 10-year yield was 27 basis points lower, year-over-year. The spread between the 2-year and 10-year Treasury yield points on the curve decreased to +56 basis points at February month-end versus +71 basis points at January month-end. The prior 2-year/10-year yield curve inversion, which spanned from July 2022 to August 2024,was historically long. The average historical spread (since 2005)is about +95 basis points. The spread between the 3-month and 10-year Treasury yield points on the curve was +28 basis points in February versus +58 basis points in January. BOND YIELDS 13 107 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 107 of 2882 ACCOUNT PROFILE 14 108 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 108 of 2882 OBJECTIVES Investment Objectives The City of Cupertino's investment objectives, in order of priority, are to provide safety to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio, provide sufficient liquidity for cash needs and a market rate of return consistent with the investment program. Chandler Asset Management Performance Objective The performance objective for the portfolio is to earn a total rate of return through a market cycle that is equal to or above the return on the benchmark index. Strategy In order to achieve these objectives, the portfolio invests in high quality fixed incomes securities consistent with the investment policy and California Government Code. 15 109 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 109 of 2882 STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Rules Name Limit Actual Compliance Status Notes AGENCY MORTGAGE SECURITIES Max % (MV)100.0 11.5 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV; Agencies & Agency CMOs)25.0 11.5 Compliant Max Maturity (Years)5.0 4.9 Compliant ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES (ABS) Max % (MV; Non Agency ABS & MBS)20.0 7.6 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV)5.0 0.8 Compliant Max Maturity (Years)5 4 Compliant Min Rating (AA- by 1)0.0 0.0 Compliant BANKERS' ACCEPTANCES Max % (MV)40.0 0.0 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV)5.0 0.0 Compliant Max Maturity (Days)180 0.0 Compliant Min Rating (A-1 by 1 or A- by 1)0.0 0.0 Compliant CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT PLACEMENT SERVICE (CDARS) Max % (MV)30.0 0.0 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV)5.0 0.0 Compliant Max Maturity (Years)5.0 0.0 Compliant COLLATERALIZED TIME DEPOSITS (NON- NEGOTIABLE CD/TD) Max % (MV; FDIC & Collateralized CD/TD)30.0 0.0 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV)5.0 0.0 Compliant Max Maturity (Years)5.0 0.0 Compliant COMMERCIAL PAPER Max % (MV)25.0 0.0 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV)5.0 0.0 Compliant Max Maturity (Days)270 0.0 Compliant Min Rating (A-1 by 1 or A- by 1)0.0 0.0 Compliant CORPORATE MEDIUM TERM NOTES 16 110 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 110 of 2882 STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Rules Name Limit Actual Compliance Status Notes Max % (MV)30.0 27.6 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV)5.0 1.3 Compliant Max Maturity (Years)5 4 Compliant Min Rating (A- by 1)0.0 0.0 Compliant FDIC INSURED TIME DEPOSITS (NON-NEGOTIABLE CD/TD) Max % (MV; FDIC & Collateralized CD/TD)30.0 0.0 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV)5.0 0.0 Compliant Max Maturity (Years)5 0.0 Compliant FEDERAL AGENCIES Max % (MV)100.0 3.5 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV; Agencies & Agency CMOs)25.0 11.5 Compliant Max Callables (MV)20.0 0.0 Compliant Max Maturity (Years)5 1 Compliant LOCAL AGENCY INVESTMENT FUND (LAIF) Max Concentration (MV)75.0 0.0 Compliant MONEY MARKET MUTUAL FUNDS Max % (MV)20.0 1.0 Compliant Min Rating (AAA by 2)0.0 0.0 Compliant MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES (NON-AGENCY) Max % (MV)20.0 0.0 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV)5.0 0.0 Compliant Max Maturity (Years)5.0 0.0 Compliant Min Rating (AA- by 1)0.0 0.0 Compliant MUNICIPAL SECURITIES (CA, LOCAL AGENCY) Max % (MV)30.0 0.9 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV)5.0 0.9 Compliant Max Maturity (Years)5 3 Compliant Min Rating (A- by 1)0.0 0.0 Compliant MUNICIPAL SECURITIES (CA, OTHER STATES) 17 111 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 111 of 2882 STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Rules Name Limit Actual Compliance Status Notes Max % (MV)30.0 0.0 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV)5.0 0.0 Compliant Max Maturity (Years)5 0.0 Compliant Min Rating (A- by 1)0.0 0.0 Compliant NEGOTIABLE CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT (NCD) Max % (MV)30.0 0.0 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV)5.0 0.0 Compliant Max Maturity (Years)5 0.0 Compliant Min Rating (A-1 by 1 or A- by 1 if > FDIC Limit)0.0 0.0 Compliant REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS Max % (MV)10.0 0.0 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV)5.0 0.0 Compliant Max Maturity (Years)1.0 0.0 Compliant SUPRANATIONAL OBLIGATIONS Max % (MV)30.0 2.9 Compliant Max % Issuer (MV)10.0 1.7 Compliant Max Maturity (Years)5 4 Compliant Min Rating (AA- by 1)0.0 0.0 Compliant U.S. TREASURIES Max % (MV)100.0 45.0 Compliant Max Maturity (Years)5 4 Compliant 18 112 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 112 of 2882 PORTFOLIO SUMMARY Sector Allocation Performance Review Total Rate of Return**1M 3M YTD 1YR 2YRS 3YRS 5YRS 10YRS Since Inception (02/01/19) City of Cupertino 0.82%1.26%1.06%5.57%5.58%5.31%1.99%--2.50% Benchmark Return 0.79%1.15%0.95%5.20%5.05%4.91%1.65%--2.24% City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Portfolio Characteristics Account Summary Maturity Distribution Top Issuers Credit Quality* Average Modified Duration 2.61 Average Coupon 3.74% Average Purchase YTM 4.03% Average Market YTM 3.65% Average Credit Quality*AA+ Average Final Maturity 3.03 Average Life 2.84 End Values as of 01/31/2026 End Values as of 02/28/2026 Market Value 206,174,722.48 207,990,852.81 Accrued Interest 1,600,582.56 1,474,068.58 Total Market Value 207,775,305.04 209,464,921.39 Income Earned 438,034.24 520,350.40 Cont/WD 0.00 0.00 Par 206,274,386.28 207,146,288.30 Book Value 204,717,752.76 205,526,481.72 Cost Value 204,173,834.30 204,980,764.26 United States 44.96% Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp 11.48% Farm Credit System 2.54% International Bank for Recon and Dev 1.69% Morgan Stanley 1.66% Guardian Life Global Funding 1.31% The Home Depot, Inc.1.27% Toyota Motor Corporation 1.24% *The average credit quality is a weighted average calculation of the highest of S&P, Moody’s and Fitch. **Periods over 1 year are annualized. Benchmark: ICE BofA 1-5 Year Unsubordinated US Treasury & Agency Index 19 113 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 113 of 2882 ISSUERS City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Issuer Investment Type % Portfolio United States US Treasury 44.96% Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp Agency CMBS 11.48% Farm Credit System Agency 2.54% International Bank for Recon and Dev Supras 1.69% Morgan Stanley Corporate 1.66% Guardian Life Global Funding Corporate 1.31% The Home Depot, Inc.Corporate 1.27% Toyota Motor Corporation Corporate 1.24% Inter-American Development Bank Supras 1.18% Meta Platforms, Inc.Corporate 1.17% New York Life Insurance Company Corporate 1.17% Royal Bank of Canada Corporate 0.99% Northwestern Mutual Global Funding Corporate 0.98% Wells Fargo & Company Money Mkt Fd 0.95% UnitedHealth Group Incorporated Corporate 0.93% Federal Home Loan Banks Agency 0.91% Simon Property Group, Inc.Corporate 0.91% PACCAR Inc Corporate 0.90% Chubb Limited Corporate 0.86% State of California Muni Bonds 0.86% American Honda Finance Corporation Corporate 0.85% Pricoa Global Funding I Corporate 0.85% Chase Issuance Trust ABS 0.82% Bank of America Credit Card Trust ABS 0.80% Mercedes-Benz Auto Lease Trust ABS 0.78% Berkshire Hathaway Inc.Corporate 0.77% PepsiCo, Inc.Corporate 0.74% Citigroup Inc ABS 0.73% Prologis, Inc.Corporate 0.73% Alphabet Inc.Corporate 0.73% 20 114 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 114 of 2882 ISSUERS City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Issuer Investment Type % Portfolio Bank of America Corporation Corporate 0.73% The Progressive Corporation Corporate 0.72% JPMorgan Chase & Co.Corporate 0.72% Realty Income Corporation Corporate 0.70% American Express Credit Master Trust ABS 0.69% Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.Corporate 0.69% WF Card Issuance Trust ABS 0.67% Visa Inc.Corporate 0.65% Met Tower Global Funding Corporate 0.63% Caterpillar Inc.Corporate 0.59% Cargill, Incorporated Corporate 0.53% Hyundai Auto Lease Sec Trust ABS 0.52% BMW Vehicle Lease Trust ABS 0.51% National Rural Utilities Cooperative Corporate 0.50% The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.Corporate 0.49% Deere & Company Corporate 0.49% Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Corporate 0.49% Pacific Mutual Holding Company Corporate 0.49% Mastercard Incorporated Corporate 0.46% Honda Auto Receivables Owner Trust ABS 0.46% The Charles Schwab Corporation Corporate 0.46% GM Financial Securitized Term ABS 0.45% Toyota Auto Receivables Owner Trust ABS 0.33% Mercedes-Benz Auto Receivables Trust ABS 0.31% John Deere Owner Trust ABS 0.29% BMW Vehicle Owner Trust ABS 0.29% Cash Cash 0.19% Walmart Inc.Corporate 0.17% WC MMF Sweep Money Mkt Fd 0.03% TOTAL 100.00% 21 115 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 115 of 2882 HISTORICAL AVERAGE PURCHASE YIELD City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Purchase Yield as of 02/28/26 = 4.03% 22 116 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 116 of 2882 PORTFOLIO HOLDINGS 23 117 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 117 of 2882 HOLDINGS REPORT City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/ Units Purchase Date Purchase Yield Cost Value Book Value Mkt Price Mkt YTM Market Value Accrued Int. % of Port. Gain/Loss Moody's/ S&P/ Fitch Maturity Duration ABS 47800AAC4 JDOT 2022-B A3 3.74 02/16/2027 20,575.83 07/12/2022 3.77% 20,573.87 20,575.43 99.99 4.03% 20,573.90 34.20 0.01% (1.53) Aaa/NA AAA 0.97 0.04 44934FAD7 HALST 2024-B A3 5.41 05/17/2027 438,981.82 05/14/2024 5.41% 438,969.61 438,976.87 100.38 3.54% 440,662.68 1,055.51 0.21% 1,685.81 NA/AAA AAA 1.21 0.20 47800BAC2 JDOT 2022-C A3 5.09 06/15/2027 144,489.54 10/12/2022 5.15% 144,478.33 144,486.47 100.17 3.80% 144,737.77 326.87 0.07% 251.30 Aaa/NA AAA 1.29 0.12 89231FAD2 TAOT 2023-C A3 5.16 04/17/2028 679,047.61 11/21/2023 5.65% 676,288.98 677,711.24 100.62 3.80% 683,279.43 1,557.28 0.33% 5,568.20 NA/AAA AAA 2.13 0.44 438123AC5 HAROT 2023-4 A3 5.67 06/21/2028 485,004.22 -- 5.64% 486,204.78 485,487.59 101.06 3.84% 490,161.27 763.88 0.24% 4,673.68 Aaa/NA AAA 2.31 0.53 05594HAD5 BMWLT 2025-2 A3 3.97 09/25/2028 1,050,000.00 10/08/2025 4.32% 1,049,997.06 1,049,997.43 100.37 3.72% 1,053,889.20 694.75 0.51% 3,891.77 NA/AAA AAA 2.57 1.31 58769FAC9 MBART 2023-2 A3 5.95 11/15/2028 627,133.74 11/29/2023 3.88% 640,411.33 632,906.61 101.23 3.82% 634,848.74 1,658.42 0.31% 1,942.13 NA/AAA AAA 2.71 0.56 47800RAD5 JDOT 2024 A3 4.96 11/15/2028 429,889.45 03/25/2024 5.13% 429,687.94 429,771.69 100.83 3.66% 433,474.73 947.67 0.21% 3,703.04 Aaa/NA AAA 2.71 0.62 05522RDH8 BACCT 2023-2 A 4.98 11/16/2026 850,000.00 01/24/2024 4.58% 858,798.83 852,231.76 100.85 3.78% 857,252.20 1,881.33 0.41% 5,020.44 Aaa/NA AAA 0.71 0.68 437930AC4 HAROT 2024-2 A3 5.27 11/20/2028 453,307.78 05/14/2024 5.27% 453,252.71 453,274.45 101.03 3.82% 457,975.49 862.67 0.22% 4,701.04 NA/AAA AAA 2.73 0.68 448970AD5 HALST 2026-A A3 3.97 12/15/2028 635,000.00 01/12/2026 3.98% 634,906.91 634,910.34 100.42 3.76% 637,698.12 1,120.42 0.31% 2,787.78 NA/AAA AAA 2.80 1.76 36268GAD7 GMCAR 2024-1 A3 4.85 12/18/2028 929,154.91 -- 4.97% 927,681.50 928,266.79 100.62 3.82% 934,953.77 1,877.67 0.45% 6,686.97 Aaa/NA AAA 2.80 0.58 161571HV9 CHAIT 241 A 4.6 01/16/2029 1,690,000.00 01/24/2024 4.61% 1,689,742.61 1,689,850.56 100.78 3.71% 1,703,195.52 3,455.11 0.82% 13,344.96 NA/AAA AAA 2.88 0.84 096919AD7 BMWOT 2024-A A3 5.18 02/26/2029 592,121.75 06/04/2024 5.18% 592,031.80 592,064.62 100.89 3.92% 597,383.34 511.20 0.29% 5,318.72 Aaa/AAA NA 3.00 0.68 58770XAD5 MBALT 2025-B A3 3.88 04/16/2029 1,045,000.00 10/16/2025 4.57% 1,044,828.52 1,044,846.05 100.30 3.74% 1,048,118.28 1,802.04 0.50% 3,272.23 NA/AAA AAA 3.13 1.72 05522RDJ4 BACCT 2024-1 A 4.93 05/15/2029 785,000.00 06/06/2024 4.93% 784,955.96 784,971.41 101.48 3.70% 796,604.66 1,720.02 0.38% 11,633.25 Aaa/AAA NA 3.21 1.15 24 118 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 118 of 2882 HOLDINGS REPORT City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/ Units Purchase Date Purchase Yield Cost Value Book Value Mkt Price Mkt YTM Market Value Accrued Int. % of Port. Gain/Loss Moody's/ S&P/ Fitch Maturity Duration 58770YAD3 MBALT 2026-A A3 3.93 01/15/2030 570,000.00 01/13/2026 3.97% 569,886.97 569,890.00 100.39 3.76% 572,244.09 995.60 0.28% 2,354.09 Aaa/NA AAA 3.88 1.96 02582JKP4 AMXCA 2025-2 A 4.28 04/15/2030 1,420,000.00 05/06/2025 4.28% 1,419,974.30 1,419,978.47 101.39 3.63% 1,439,718.12 2,701.16 0.69% 19,739.65 NA/AAA AAA 4.13 1.99 92970QAJ4 WFCIT 2025-1 A 4.34 05/15/2030 1,365,000.00 06/03/2025 4.33% 1,364,977.34 1,364,980.66 101.49 3.66% 1,385,380.82 2,632.93 0.67% 20,400.15 NA/AAA AAA 4.21 2.06 17305EHA6 CCCIT 2025-A1 A1 4.3 06/21/2030 1,500,000.00 10/09/2025 3.90% 1,515,000.00 1,512,837.56 101.46 3.63% 1,521,948.00 12,541.67 0.73% 9,110.44 Aaa/AAA NA 4.31 2.16 15,742,649.36 100.92 15,854,100.12 7.62%3.05 Total ABS 15,709,706.65 4.58%15,728,016.00 3.73%39,140.40 126,084.11 1.26 AGENCY 3130B0TY5 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS 4.75 04/09/2027 1,875,000.00 04/10/2024 4.85% 1,870,050.00 1,873,170.36 101.31 3.53% 1,899,481.88 35,130.21 0.91% 26,311.52 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 1.11 1.05 3133ERDS7 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP 4.75 05/06/2027 2,400,000.00 06/20/2024 4.55% 2,412,552.00 2,405,157.21 101.44 3.49% 2,434,562.40 36,416.67 1.17% 29,405.19 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 1.18 1.12 3133EPC60 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BANKS FUNDING CORP 4.625 11/15/2027 2,800,000.00 11/09/2023 4.73% 2,789,612.00 2,795,563.24 101.89 3.47% 2,852,917.20 38,130.56 1.37% 57,353.96 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 1.71 1.61 7,072,214.00 101.58 7,186,961.48 3.46%1.37 Total Agency 7,075,000.00 4.70%7,073,890.80 3.49%109,677.43 113,070.67 1.30 AGENCY CMBS 3137BSP72 FHMS K-058 A2 2.653 08/25/2026 650,000.00 11/12/2021 1.36% 687,451.17 653,335.29 99.33 3.82% 645,634.60 1,437.04 0.31% (7,700.69) Aa1/AA+ AAA 0.49 0.43 3137FKUP9 FHMS K-087 A2 3.771 12/25/2028 1,938,959.12 07/01/2024 4.86% 1,854,962.81 1,886,474.47 100.21 3.62% 1,943,032.87 6,093.18 0.93% 56,558.40 Aa1/AAA AA+ 2.82 2.51 3137FL6P4 FHMS K-089 A2 3.563 01/25/2029 1,288,000.00 07/03/2024 4.70% 1,228,178.44 1,250,104.49 99.69 3.62% 1,283,971.14 3,824.29 0.62% 33,866.65 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 2.91 2.67 3137H5YC5 FHMS K-748 A2 2.26 01/25/2029 2,000,000.00 07/03/2024 4.74% 1,801,718.75 1,874,393.61 96.10 3.70% 1,922,076.00 3,766.67 0.92% 47,682.39 Aa1/AA+ AAA 2.91 2.67 3137FKZZ2 FHMS K-088 A2 3.69 01/25/2029 2,550,000.00 07/17/2024 4.50% 2,465,830.08 2,496,253.57 99.99 3.63% 2,549,852.10 7,841.25 1.23% 53,598.53 Aaa/AA+ AA+ 2.91 2.63 25 119 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 119 of 2882 HOLDINGS REPORT City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/ Units Purchase Date Purchase Yield Cost Value Book Value Mkt Price Mkt YTM Market Value Accrued Int. % of Port. Gain/Loss Moody's/ S&P/ Fitch Maturity Duration 3137FLN91 FHMS K-091 A2 3.505 03/25/2029 2,500,000.00 03/20/2025 4.25% 2,431,738.28 2,447,936.78 99.50 3.63% 2,487,462.50 7,302.08 1.20% 39,525.72 Aa1/AAA AA+ 3.07 2.76 3137FMCR1 FHMS K-093 A2 2.982 05/25/2029 1,967,475.38 09/19/2024 3.82% 1,898,152.61 1,919,733.45 98.06 3.62% 1,929,225.69 4,889.18 0.93% 9,492.24 Aa1/AA+ AAA 3.24 2.84 3137FNAE0 FHMS K-095 A2 2.785 06/25/2029 2,200,000.00 07/17/2024 4.47% 2,039,382.82 2,092,741.31 97.34 3.64% 2,141,416.20 5,105.83 1.03% 48,674.89 Aa1/AA+ AAA 3.32 3.01 3137FPHK4 FHMS K-098 A2 2.425 08/25/2029 1,600,000.00 09/03/2024 4.00% 1,488,375.00 1,522,111.94 96.04 3.65% 1,536,660.80 3,233.33 0.74% 14,548.86 Aa1/AA+ AAA 3.49 3.19 3137FPJG1 FHMS K-099 A2 2.595 09/25/2029 1,500,000.00 06/05/2025 4.21% 1,407,011.72 1,422,911.27 96.45 3.66% 1,446,811.50 3,243.75 0.70% 23,900.23 Aa1/AA+ AAA 3.57 3.25 3137FRUT6 FHMS K-106 A2 2.069 01/25/2030 2,000,000.00 06/06/2025 4.37% 1,810,078.13 1,840,077.80 94.10 3.70% 1,882,020.00 3,448.33 0.90% 41,942.20 Aa1/AA+ AAA 3.91 3.65 3137FTZQ3 FHMS K-110 A2 1.477 04/25/2030 1,500,000.00 09/03/2025 3.96% 1,348,652.34 1,364,459.36 91.71 3.72% 1,375,662.00 1,846.25 0.66% 11,202.64 Aa1/AA+ AAA 4.15 3.80 3137FWG79 FHMS K-115 A2 1.383 06/25/2030 2,000,000.00 12/10/2025 3.99% 1,787,343.75 1,797,265.10 90.74 3.74% 1,814,756.00 2,305.00 0.87% 17,490.90 Aa1/AA+ AAA 4.32 4.07 3137FXZ35 FHMS K-127 A2 2.108 01/25/2031 1,000,000.00 02/03/2026 4.11% 910,937.50 912,081.88 92.56 3.78% 925,588.00 1,756.67 0.45% 13,506.12 Aa1/AA+ AAA 4.91 4.53 23,159,813.40 96.82 23,884,169.40 11.48%3.33 Total Agency CMBS 24,694,434.50 4.24%23,479,880.31 3.67%56,092.85 404,289.09 3.04 CASH CCYUSD Receivable 396,692.96 --396,692.96 396,692.96 1.00 396,692.96 0.00 0.19% 0.00 Aaa/AAA AAA 0.00 0.00 396,692.96 1.00 396,692.96 0.19%0.00 Total Cash 396,692.96 396,692.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 CORPORATE 931142ER0 WALMART INC 1.05 09/17/2026 350,000.00 09/08/2021 1.09% 349,338.50 349,927.55 98.55 3.78% 344,926.75 1,674.17 0.17% (5,000.80) Aa2/AA AA 0.55 0.53 808513BY0 CHARLES SCHWAB CORP 2.45 03/03/2027 960,000.00 03/01/2022 2.46% 959,729.90 959,941.68 98.73 3.75% 947,788.80 11,629.33 0.46% (12,152.88) A2/A- A 1.01 0.97 26 120 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 120 of 2882 HOLDINGS REPORT City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/ Units Purchase Date Purchase Yield Cost Value Book Value Mkt Price Mkt YTM Market Value Accrued Int. % of Port. Gain/Loss Moody's/ S&P/ Fitch Maturity Duration 084664CZ2 BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY FINANCE CORP 2.3 03/15/2027 1,615,000.00 03/07/2022 2.30% 1,614,693.15 1,614,936.31 98.63 3.66% 1,592,814.75 17,127.97 0.77% (22,121.57) Aa2/AA A+ 1.04 1.00 57636QAW4 MASTERCARD INC 4.875 03/09/2028 945,000.00 03/06/2023 4.90% 944,083.35 944,629.23 102.19 3.74% 965,682.27 22,010.63 0.46% 21,053.04 Aa3/A+ NA 2.03 1.80 61690U8E3 MORGAN STANLEY BANK NA 4.968 07/14/2028 1,950,000.00 07/17/2024 4.97% 1,950,000.00 1,950,000.00 101.28 4.25% 1,974,975.60 12,647.70 0.95% 24,975.60 Aa3/A+ AA- 2.38 1.30 69371RU20 PACCAR FINANCIAL CORP 4.0 11/07/2028 1,865,000.00 11/05/2025 4.02% 1,863,955.60 1,864,064.23 100.73 3.71% 1,878,616.37 23,623.33 0.90% 14,552.13 A1/A+ NA 2.69 2.49 58989V2M5 MET TOWER GLOBAL FUNDING 4.0 01/14/2029 1,310,000.00 01/07/2026 4.05% 1,308,310.10 1,308,381.03 100.15 3.94% 1,311,941.42 6,841.11 0.63% 3,560.39 Aa3/AA- AA- 2.88 2.67 74340XBL4 PROLOGIS LP 4.375 02/01/2029 1,500,000.00 07/18/2024 4.68% 1,481,235.00 1,487,912.53 101.29 3.90% 1,519,387.50 5,468.75 0.73% 31,474.97 A2/A NA 2.93 2.49 78016HZV5 ROYAL BANK OF CANADA 4.95 02/01/2029 2,000,000.00 10/31/2024 4.69% 2,019,920.00 2,013,699.01 103.18 3.79% 2,063,546.00 8,250.00 0.99% 49,846.99 A1/A AA- 2.93 2.69 743315AV5 PROGRESSIVE CORP 4.0 03/01/2029 1,500,000.00 07/16/2024 4.72% 1,455,495.00 1,471,103.39 100.44 3.84% 1,506,672.00 30,000.00 0.72% 35,568.61 A2/A A 3.00 2.58 64952WFG3 NEW YORK LIFE GLOBAL FUNDING 5.0 06/06/2029 1,000,000.00 07/01/2024 5.12% 994,880.00 996,606.58 103.34 3.90% 1,033,401.00 11,805.56 0.50% 36,794.42 Aa1/AA+ AAA 3.27 2.96 437076BY7 HOME DEPOT INC 2.95 06/15/2029 1,663,000.00 09/17/2024 3.93% 1,593,203.89 1,614,533.84 97.50 3.77% 1,621,398.39 10,356.79 0.78% 6,864.55 A2/A A 3.29 3.08 437076DC3 HOME DEPOT INC 4.75 06/25/2029 1,000,000.00 07/01/2024 4.93% 992,260.00 994,842.84 102.98 3.78% 1,029,827.00 8,708.33 0.50% 34,984.16 A2/A A 3.32 2.96 756109CB8 REALTY INCOME CORP 4.0 07/15/2029 1,463,000.00 08/08/2024 4.69% 1,419,212.41 1,433,046.47 100.09 3.97% 1,464,291.83 7,477.56 0.70% 31,245.36 A3/A- NA 3.38 2.89 713448FX1 PEPSICO INC 4.5 07/17/2029 1,500,000.00 07/15/2024 4.53% 1,497,675.00 1,498,428.78 102.34 3.75% 1,535,142.00 8,250.00 0.74% 36,713.22 A1/A+ NA 3.38 3.03 46647PAV8 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO 4.203 07/23/2029 1,500,000.00 09/17/2024 4.27% 1,496,610.00 1,497,887.29 100.43 4.35% 1,506,493.50 6,654.75 0.72% 8,606.21 A1/A AA- 3.40 2.25 06051GHM4 BANK OF AMERICA CORP 4.271 07/23/2029 1,500,000.00 09/17/2024 4.29% 1,498,710.00 1,499,196.05 100.57 4.37% 1,508,484.00 6,762.42 0.73% 9,287.95 A1/A- AA- 3.40 2.24 30303M8S4 META PLATFORMS INC 4.3 08/15/2029 912,000.00 08/12/2024 4.33% 910,584.09 911,020.65 101.61 3.80% 926,688.67 1,742.93 0.45% 15,668.02 Aa3/AA- NA 3.46 3.11 171239AL0 CHUBB INA HOLDINGS LLC 4.65 08/15/2029 1,750,000.00 -- 4.44% 1,765,746.34 1,761,069.71 102.64 3.83% 1,796,229.75 3,616.67 0.86% 35,160.05 A2/A A 3.46 3.09 27 121 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 121 of 2882 HOLDINGS REPORT City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/ Units Purchase Date Purchase Yield Cost Value Book Value Mkt Price Mkt YTM Market Value Accrued Int. % of Port. Gain/Loss Moody's/ S&P/ Fitch Maturity Duration 91324PDS8 UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC 2.875 08/15/2029 2,000,000.00 09/17/2024 3.94% 1,906,080.00 1,933,805.27 96.62 3.93% 1,932,470.00 2,555.56 0.93% (1,335.27) A2/A+ A 3.46 3.24 02665WFQ9 AMERICAN HONDA FINANCE CORP 4.4 09/05/2029 1,750,000.00 10/02/2024 4.29% 1,758,102.50 1,755,786.21 101.41 3.97% 1,774,659.25 37,644.44 0.85% 18,873.04 A3/A- NA 3.52 3.16 40139LBJ1 GUARDIAN LIFE GLOBAL FUNDING 4.179 09/26/2029 1,205,000.00 09/23/2024 4.18% 1,205,000.00 1,205,000.00 100.49 4.03% 1,210,932.22 21,681.46 0.58% 5,932.22 Aa1/AA+ NA 3.57 3.23 61748UAK8 MORGAN STANLEY 4.133 10/18/2029 1,470,000.00 10/17/2025 4.25% 1,470,184.60 1,470,162.62 100.16 4.21% 1,472,278.50 21,770.58 0.71% 2,115.88 A1/A- A+ 3.64 2.43 38141GD27 GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP INC 4.153 10/21/2029 1,025,000.00 10/14/2025 4.37% 1,025,000.00 1,025,000.00 100.03 4.25% 1,025,320.83 15,371.87 0.49% 320.83 A2/BBB+ A 3.64 2.44 14913UAU4 CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP 4.7 11/15/2029 1,200,000.00 11/14/2024 4.74% 1,198,092.00 1,198,584.15 102.89 3.85% 1,234,656.00 16,606.67 0.59% 36,071.85 A2/A A+ 3.71 3.34 64952WFK4 NEW YORK LIFE GLOBAL FUNDING 4.6 12/05/2029 1,365,000.00 12/02/2024 4.61% 1,364,221.95 1,364,414.12 102.18 3.97% 1,394,762.46 14,999.83 0.67% 30,348.34 Aa1/AA+ AAA 3.77 3.39 89236TNA9 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP 4.95 01/09/2030 1,445,000.00 01/06/2025 5.00% 1,441,907.70 1,442,612.19 103.67 3.91% 1,498,069.07 10,331.75 0.72% 55,456.88 A1/A+ A+ 3.86 3.47 63743HFX5 NATIONAL RURAL UTILITIES COOPERATIVE FINANCE CORP 4.95 02/07/2030 1,000,000.00 02/05/2025 4.88% 1,002,873.61 1,002,254.06 103.60 3.95% 1,036,042.00 3,300.00 0.50% 33,787.94 A2/NA A 3.94 3.48 571748CA8 MARSH & MCLENNAN COMPANIES INC 4.65 03/15/2030 1,400,000.00 03/11/2025 4.69% 1,397,340.00 1,397,848.96 101.99 4.11% 1,427,928.60 30,018.33 0.69% 30,079.64 A3/A- A- 4.04 3.51 57629TBX4 MASSMUTUAL GLOBAL FUNDING II 4.55 05/07/2030 1,000,000.00 05/01/2025 4.58% 998,670.00 998,887.05 101.74 4.09% 1,017,396.00 14,408.33 0.49% 18,508.95 Aa3/AA+ AA+ 4.19 3.73 66815L2W8 NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL GLOBAL FUNDING 4.6 06/03/2030 1,000,000.00 06/12/2025 4.51% 1,004,040.00 1,003,459.36 101.86 4.12% 1,018,647.00 11,244.44 0.49% 15,187.64 Aa1/AA+ AAA 4.26 3.80 828807DK0 SIMON PROPERTY GROUP LP 2.65 07/15/2030 2,000,000.00 08/19/2025 4.32% 1,853,380.00 1,869,188.75 94.50 4.04% 1,889,958.00 6,772.22 0.91% 20,769.25 A3/A NA 4.38 4.05 40139LBN2 GUARDIAN LIFE GLOBAL FUNDING 4.327 10/06/2030 1,500,000.00 09/30/2025 4.33% 1,500,000.00 1,500,000.00 100.74 4.15% 1,511,098.50 26,142.29 0.73% 11,098.50 Aa1/AA+ NA 4.60 4.06 24422EYF0 JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 4.375 10/15/2030 1,000,000.00 11/04/2025 4.22% 1,006,920.00 1,006,475.28 101.76 3.95% 1,017,626.00 16,527.78 0.49% 11,150.72 A1/A A+ 4.63 4.09 141781CF9 CARGILL INC 4.125 10/23/2030 1,100,000.00 10/20/2025 4.14% 1,099,171.70 1,099,230.22 100.36 4.04% 1,103,996.30 16,133.33 0.53% 4,766.08 A2/A NA 4.65 4.06 28 122 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 122 of 2882 HOLDINGS REPORT City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/ Units Purchase Date Purchase Yield Cost Value Book Value Mkt Price Mkt YTM Market Value Accrued Int. % of Port. Gain/Loss Moody's/ S&P/ Fitch Maturity Duration 30303MAB8 META PLATFORMS INC 4.2 11/15/2030 1,500,000.00 11/13/2025 4.16% 1,502,895.00 1,502,727.08 100.88 3.99% 1,513,192.50 20,650.00 0.73% 10,465.42 Aa3/AA- NA 4.71 4.11 74153WCZ0 PRICOA GLOBAL FUNDING I 4.35 11/25/2030 1,750,000.00 12/08/2025 4.36% 1,749,440.00 1,749,465.34 101.05 4.10% 1,768,448.50 20,300.00 0.85% 18,983.16 Aa3/NA AA- 4.74 4.19 89236TPH2 TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORP 4.2 01/10/2031 1,080,000.00 01/07/2026 4.21% 1,079,665.20 1,079,674.01 100.75 4.03% 1,088,063.28 6,174.00 0.52% 8,389.27 A1/A+ A+ 4.87 4.33 66815L2Z1 NORTHWESTERN MUTUAL GLOBAL FUNDING 4.3 01/13/2031 1,020,000.00 01/06/2026 4.30% 1,019,908.20 1,019,910.56 100.54 4.17% 1,025,538.60 5,848.00 0.49% 5,628.04 Aa1/AA+ AAA 4.87 4.33 6944PL3M9 PACIFIC LIFE GLOBAL FUNDING II 4.375 02/03/2031 1,000,000.00 01/29/2026 4.34% 1,001,380.00 1,001,360.35 101.18 4.11% 1,011,841.00 3,402.78 0.49% 10,480.65 Aa3/AA- AA- 4.93 4.38 92826CAZ5 VISA INC 4.1 02/12/2031 1,345,000.00 02/03/2026 4.13% 1,343,197.70 1,343,214.48 101.16 3.84% 1,360,593.93 2,910.43 0.65% 17,379.45 Aa3/AA- NA 4.96 4.37 02079KBK2 ALPHABET INC 4.1 02/15/2031 1,500,000.00 02/12/2026 4.10% 1,500,087.78 1,500,087.16 100.66 3.95% 1,509,874.50 3,075.00 0.73% 9,787.34 Aa2/AA+ NA 4.96 4.37 Total Corporate 56,938,000.00 4.32% 56,543,200.27 56,640,374.37 100.80 3.97% 57,371,700.62 532,517.10 27.58% 731,326.25 3.59 3.10 MONEY MARKET FUND 992995944 WC MMF SWEEP 52,938.56 -- 1.80% 52,938.56 52,938.56 1.00 1.80% 52,938.56 0.00 0.03% 0.00 NA/NA NA 0.00 0.00 VP4520004 WF ADV 100% TREAS MM FD-SVC CL #008 1,979,515.63 -- 3.22% 1,979,515.63 1,979,515.63 1.00 3.22% 1,979,515.63 0.00 0.95% 0.00 Aaa/AAAm NA 0.00 0.00 Total Money Market Fund 2,032,454.19 3.18% 2,032,454.19 2,032,454.19 1.00 3.18% 2,032,454.19 0.00 0.98% 0.00 0.00 0.00 MUNICIPAL BONDS 13063EGT7 CALIFORNIA STATE 4.5 08/01/2029 1,740,000.00 10/30/2024 4.38% 1,749,169.80 1,746,620.28 102.97 3.57% 1,791,691.92 6,525.00 0.86% 45,071.64 Aa2/AA- AA 3.42 3.14 Total Municipal Bonds 1,740,000.00 4.38% 1,749,169.80 1,746,620.28 102.97 3.57% 1,791,691.92 6,525.00 0.86% 45,071.64 3.42 3.14 SUPRANATIONAL 29 123 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 123 of 2882 HOLDINGS REPORT City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/ Units Purchase Date Purchase Yield Cost Value Book Value Mkt Price Mkt YTM Market Value Accrued Int. % of Port. Gain/Loss Moody's/ S&P/ Fitch Maturity Duration 4581X0DV7 INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK 0.875 04/20/2026 2,460,000.00 04/13/2021 0.97% 2,448,733.20 2,459,691.49 99.60 3.86% 2,450,216.58 7,832.71 1.18% (9,474.91) Aaa/AAA NA 0.14 0.13 459058LN1 INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPM 3.875 10/16/2029 1,750,000.00 12/12/2024 4.25% 1,721,510.00 1,728,648.61 101.34 3.48% 1,773,366.00 25,427.50 0.85% 44,717.39 Aaa/AAA NA 3.63 3.31 459058LR2 INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPM 4.125 03/20/2030 1,700,000.00 03/14/2025 4.20% 1,694,220.00 1,695,315.22 102.30 3.51% 1,739,171.40 31,361.46 0.84% 43,856.18 Aaa/AAA NA 4.05 3.64 Total Supranational 5,910,000.00 2.89% 5,864,463.20 5,883,655.33 100.91 3.64% 5,962,753.98 64,621.67 2.87% 79,098.65 2.32 2.10 US TREASURY 91282CBW0 UNITED STATES TREASURY 0.75 04/30/2026 2,500,000.00 05/27/2021 0.80% 2,493,652.34 2,499,788.18 99.51 3.75% 2,487,812.50 6,267.27 1.20% (11,975.68) Aa1/AA+ AA+ 0.17 0.16 912797UB1 UNITED STATES TREASURY 06/23/2026 2,000,000.00 02/25/2026 3.68% 1,976,657.85 1,977,256.37 98.87 3.68% 1,977,494.00 0.00 0.95% 237.63 P-1/A-1+ F1+ 0.31 0.31 91282CCZ2 UNITED STATES TREASURY 0.875 09/30/2026 1,400,000.00 10/18/2021 1.19% 1,379,054.68 1,397,531.07 98.42 3.65% 1,377,933.20 5,115.38 0.66% (19,597.87) Aa1/AA+ AA+ 0.59 0.57 91282CDG3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 1.125 10/31/2026 1,400,000.00 11/15/2021 1.25% 1,391,468.75 1,398,849.30 98.35 3.66% 1,376,942.00 5,264.50 0.66% (21,907.30) Aa1/AA+ AA+ 0.67 0.65 91282CJP7 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.375 12/15/2026 2,500,000.00 12/28/2023 4.01% 2,525,097.66 2,506,703.53 100.63 3.56% 2,515,645.00 22,836.54 1.21% 8,941.47 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 0.79 0.76 91282CKJ9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.5 04/15/2027 2,300,000.00 04/17/2024 4.77% 2,283,109.38 2,293,658.28 101.09 3.50% 2,324,975.70 38,954.67 1.12% 31,317.42 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 1.13 1.07 91282CKR1 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.5 05/15/2027 3,200,000.00 05/08/2024 4.65% 3,186,500.00 3,194,575.34 101.18 3.49% 3,237,625.60 42,165.75 1.56% 43,050.26 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 1.21 1.15 91282CEW7 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.25 06/30/2027 3,250,000.00 -- 3.18% 3,260,312.50 3,252,674.75 99.73 3.46% 3,241,241.25 17,506.91 1.56% (11,433.50) Aa1/AA+ AA+ 1.33 1.29 91282CFB2 UNITED STATES TREASURY 2.75 07/31/2027 400,000.00 08/22/2022 3.12% 393,218.75 398,055.51 99.04 3.45% 396,156.40 881.22 0.19% (1,899.11) Aa1/AA+ AA+ 1.42 1.37 91282CFH9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.125 08/31/2027 4,500,000.00 -- 3.28% 4,468,902.34 4,490,617.63 99.54 3.44% 4,479,435.00 382.13 2.15% (11,182.63) Aa1/AA+ AA+ 1.50 1.45 91282CFM8 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.125 09/30/2027 3,450,000.00 -- 4.31% 3,421,152.34 3,440,719.85 101.06 3.43% 3,486,656.25 59,427.20 1.68% 45,936.40 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 1.59 1.49 30 124 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 124 of 2882 HOLDINGS REPORT City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/ Units Purchase Date Purchase Yield Cost Value Book Value Mkt Price Mkt YTM Market Value Accrued Int. % of Port. Gain/Loss Moody's/ S&P/ Fitch Maturity Duration 91282CFZ9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.875 11/30/2027 850,000.00 12/05/2022 3.81% 852,656.25 850,932.61 100.77 3.41% 856,573.90 8,234.38 0.41% 5,641.29 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 1.75 1.66 91282CGC9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.875 12/31/2027 2,750,000.00 -- 3.67% 2,775,107.42 2,759,355.97 100.82 3.40% 2,772,665.50 17,662.29 1.33% 13,309.53 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 1.84 1.75 91282CGH8 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.5 01/31/2028 3,000,000.00 02/07/2023 3.81% 2,957,929.69 2,983,778.17 100.19 3.39% 3,005,742.00 8,411.60 1.45% 21,963.83 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 1.92 1.84 91282CGP0 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.0 02/29/2028 3,700,000.00 -- 4.01% 3,699,113.28 3,699,698.71 101.15 3.40% 3,742,635.10 402.17 1.80% 42,936.39 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 2.00 1.90 91282CNY3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.375 09/15/2028 5,000,000.00 10/28/2025 3.50% 4,982,812.50 4,984,822.07 99.96 3.39% 4,998,240.00 77,848.76 2.40% 13,417.93 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 2.55 2.37 91282CKG5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.125 03/31/2029 2,300,000.00 04/17/2024 4.62% 2,249,867.19 2,268,777.91 102.10 3.40% 2,348,336.80 39,618.13 1.13% 79,558.89 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 3.08 2.83 91282CKX8 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.25 06/30/2029 2,000,000.00 07/01/2024 4.41% 1,985,546.88 1,990,356.66 102.60 3.42% 2,051,954.00 14,088.40 0.99% 61,597.34 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 3.33 3.07 91282CLK5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.625 08/31/2029 3,500,000.00 09/11/2024 3.45% 3,527,480.47 3,519,386.39 100.63 3.43% 3,521,875.00 344.77 1.69% 2,488.61 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 3.50 3.26 91282CLN9 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.5 09/30/2029 5,000,000.00 -- 3.83% 4,925,039.06 4,945,893.35 100.21 3.44% 5,010,740.00 73,076.92 2.41% 64,846.65 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 3.59 3.29 91282CLR0 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.125 10/31/2029 3,000,000.00 10/31/2024 4.17% 2,993,789.06 2,995,439.64 102.33 3.44% 3,069,843.00 41,363.95 1.48% 74,403.36 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 3.67 3.34 91282CMD0 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.375 12/31/2029 4,400,000.00 -- 4.53% 4,369,171.88 4,376,146.66 103.28 3.45% 4,544,201.20 31,906.08 2.18% 168,054.54 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 3.84 3.49 91282CMG3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.25 01/31/2030 4,000,000.00 02/07/2025 4.34% 3,983,906.25 3,987,309.33 102.88 3.46% 4,115,000.00 13,618.78 1.98% 127,690.67 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 3.92 3.58 91282CGQ8 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.0 02/28/2030 4,500,000.00 -- 4.01% 4,496,958.99 4,497,507.34 101.98 3.47% 4,588,947.00 489.13 2.21% 91,439.66 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 4.00 3.67 91282CNK3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.875 06/30/2030 5,000,000.00 -- 3.78% 5,020,507.81 5,019,515.75 101.56 3.48% 5,077,930.00 32,113.26 2.44% 58,414.25 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 4.33 3.94 91282CHR5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 4.0 07/31/2030 5,000,000.00 10/23/2025 3.59% 5,089,062.50 5,082,514.54 102.06 3.49% 5,103,125.00 16,022.10 2.45% 20,610.46 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 4.42 4.01 91282CNX5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.625 08/31/2030 5,000,000.00 -- 3.66% 4,991,425.79 4,992,305.03 100.52 3.50% 5,025,975.00 492.53 2.42% 33,669.97 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 4.50 4.12 91282CPA3 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.625 09/30/2030 5,000,000.00 -- 3.59% 5,008,789.06 5,008,157.67 100.51 3.50% 5,025,585.00 75,686.81 2.42% 17,427.33 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 4.59 4.13 31 125 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 125 of 2882 HOLDINGS REPORT City of Cupertino | Account #10659 | As of February 28, 2026 Cusip Security Description Par Value/ Units Purchase Date Purchase Yield Cost Value Book Value Mkt Price Mkt YTM Market Value Accrued Int. % of Port. Gain/Loss Moody's/ S&P/ Fitch Maturity Duration 91282CPN5 UNITED STATES TREASURY 3.5 11/30/2030 1,750,000.00 12/15/2025 3.73% 1,731,816.41 1,732,569.87 99.95 3.51% 1,749,042.75 15,312.50 0.84% 16,472.88 Aa1/AA+ AA+ 4.75 4.30 Total US Treasury 92,650,000.00 3.73% 92,420,107.08 92,544,897.47 100.94 3.47% 93,510,328.15 665,494.12 44.96% 965,430.68 2.86 2.63 Total Portfolio 207,146,288.30 4.03% 204,980,764.26 205,526,481.72 99.30 3.65% 207,990,852.81 1,474,068.58 100.00% 2,464,371.10 3.03 2.61 Total Market Value + Accrued 209,464,921.39 32 126 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 126 of 2882 TRANSACTIONS 33 127 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 127 of 2882 TRANSACTION LEDGER City of Cupertino | Account #10659|02/01/2026 Through 02/28/2026| Transaction Type Settlement Date CUSIP Quantity Security Description Price Acq/Disp Yield Amount Interest Pur/ Sold Total Amount Gain/Loss ACQUISITIONS Purchase 02/06/2026 3137FXZ35 1,000,000.00 FHMS K-127 A2 2.108 01/25/2031 91.094 4.11%(910,937.50)(292.78)(911,230.28)0.00 Purchase 02/12/2026 92826CAZ5 1,345,000.00 VISA INC 4.1 02/12/2031 99.866 4.13%(1,343,197.70)0.00 (1,343,197.70)0.00 Purchase 02/17/2026 02079KBK2 612,000.00 ALPHABET INC 4.1 02/15/2031 99.951 4.11%(611,697.06)(278.80)(611,975.86)0.00 Purchase 02/17/2026 02079KBK2 888,000.00 ALPHABET INC 4.1 02/15/2031 100.044 4.09%(888,390.72)(404.53)(888,795.25)0.00 Purchase 02/26/2026 912797UB1 2,000,000.00 UNITED STATES TREASURY 06/23/2026 98.833 3.68%(1,976,657.85)0.00 (1,976,657.85)0.00 Total Purchase 5,845,000.00 (5,730,880.83)(976.11)(5,731,856.94)0.00 TOTAL ACQUISITIONS 5,845,000.00 (5,730,880.83)(976.11)(5,731,856.94)0.00 DISPOSITIONS Sale 02/06/2026 3137FBBX3 (1,000,000.00)FHMS K-068 A2 3.244 08/25/2027 99.094 4.36%990,937.50 450.56 991,388.06 6,076.89 Sale 02/26/2026 24422EXZ7 (1,430,000.00)JOHN DEERE CAPITAL CORP 4.65 01/07/2028 101.742 4.66%1,454,910.60 9,050.71 1,463,961.31 25,177.50 Total Sale (2,430,000.00)2,445,848.10 9,501.27 2,455,349.37 31,254.39 TOTAL DISPOSITIONS (2,430,000.00)2,445,848.10 9,501.27 2,455,349.37 31,254.39 34 128 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 128 of 2882 IMPORTANT DISCLOSURES 2026 Chandler Asset Management, Inc, An Independent Registered Investment Adviser. Information contained herein is confidential. Prices are provided by ICE Data Services Inc (“IDS”), an independent pricing source. In the event IDS does not provide a price or if the price provided is not reflective of fair market value, Chandler will obtain pricing from an alternative approved third party pricing source in accordance with our written valuation policy and procedures. Our valuation procedures are also disclosed in Item 5 of our Form ADV Part 2A. Performance results are presented gross-of-advisory fees and represent the client’s Total Return. The deduction of advisory fees lowers performance results. These results include the reinvestment of dividends and other earnings. Past performance may not be indicative of future results. Therefore, clients should not assume that future performance of any specific investment or investment strategy will be profitable or equal to past performance levels. All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss. Economic factors, market conditions or changes in investment strategies, contributions or withdrawals may materially alter the performance and results of your portfolio. Index returns assume reinvestment of all distributions. Historical performance results for investment indexes generally do not reflect the deduction of transaction and/or custodial charges or the deduction of an investment management fee, the incurrence of which would have the effect of decreasing historical performance results. It is not possible to invest directly in an index. Source ICE Data Indices, LLC (“ICE”), used with permission. ICE permits use of the ICE indices and related data on an “as is” basis; ICE, its affiliates and their respective third party suppliers disclaim any and all warranties and representations, express and/or implied, including any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose or use, including the indices, index data and any data included in, related to, or derived therefrom. Neither ICE data, its affiliates or their respective third party providers guarantee the quality, adequacy, accuracy, timeliness or completeness of the indices or the index data or any component thereof, and the indices and index data and all components thereof are provided on an “as is” basis and licensee’s use it at licensee’s own risk. ICE data, its affiliates and their respective third party do not sponsor, endorse, or recommend chandler asset management, or any of its products or services. This report is provided for informational purposes only and should not be construed as a specific investment or legal advice. The information contained herein was obtained from sources believed to be reliable as of the date of publication, but may become outdated or superseded at any time without notice. Any opinions or views expressed are based on current market conditions and are subject to change. This report may contain forecasts and forward-looking statements which are inherently limited and should not be relied upon as indicator of future results. Past performance is not indicative of future results. This report is not intended to constitute an offer, solicitation, recommendation or advice regarding any securities or investment strategy and should not be regarded by recipients as a substitute for the exercise of their own judgment. Fixed income investments are subject to interest, credit and market risk. Interest rate risk: the value of fixed income investments will decline as interest rates rise. Credit risk: the possibility that the borrower may not be able to repay interest and principal. Low rated bonds generally have to pay higher interest rates to attract investors willing to take on greater risk. Market risk: the bond market in general could decline due to economic conditions, especially during periods of rising interest rates. Ratings information have been provided by Moody’s, S&P and Fitch through data feeds we believe to be reliable as of the date of this statement, however we cannot guarantee its accuracy. Security level ratings for U.S. Agency issued mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”) reflect the issuer rating because the securities themselves are not rated. The issuing U.S. Agency guarantees the full and timely payment of both principal and interest. LGIP Yields: Reported yields for local government investment pools may be presented as either the 30-day yield or the monthly distribution yield, as applicable. For certain funds, the 30-day yield is calculated using reported daily yield data. Yield calculations are subject to change and may not be directly comparable across funds. LAIF Yields: Additional Disclosure for CA Clients - As a result of a reporting lag from the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), reported LAIF yields represent the most recently available Daily Effective Yield and may reflect data from approximately 7–10 days prior to month-end. 35 129 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 129 of 2882 BENCHMARK DISCLOSURES Benchmark Disclosure ICE BofA 1-5 Yr Unsubordinated US Treasury & Agency Index The ICE BofA 1-5 Year Unsubordinated US Treasury & Agency Index tracks the performance of US dollar denominated US Treasury and nonsubordinated US agency debt issued in the US domestic market. Qualifying securities must have an investment grade rating (based on an average of Moody’s, S&P and Fitch). Qualifying securities must have at least one year remaining term to final maturity and less than five years remaining term to final maturity, at least 18 months to maturity at time of issuance, a fixed coupon schedule, and a minimum amount outstanding of $1 billion for sovereigns and $250 million for agencies. 36 130 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 130 of 2882 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item Subject:Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for February 2026. Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for February 2026. CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 4/3/2026Page 1 of 1 131 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 131 of 2882 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3220 CUPERTINO.GOV 1 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Date: April 7, 2026 Subject Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for February 2026 Recommended Action Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for February 2026 Reasons for Recommendation Background California Government Code Section 41004 states: Regularly, at least once each month, the city treasurer shall submit to the city clerk a written report and accounting of all receipts, disbursements, and fund balances. The city treasurer shall file a copy with the legislative body. The City's Municipal Code Section 2.24.030 Monthly Reports states: The Treasurer shall make monthly reports which conform to the requirements of Government Code Section 41004. Said reports shall be delivered to the City Council, the City Manager and made available for review by such other persons who may so request. The Treasurer's Report (report and accounting of all receipts, disbursements, and fund balances) is made available to City Council in compliance with the aforementioned requirements. Cash vs. Accrual Basis Accounting Cash basis accounting and accrual basis accounting differ in the way revenues and expenses are recognized and recorded, primarily with regard to their timing. Under cash basis accounting, revenues are recorded when payment is received, and expenses are recorded when payment is made. This method of accounting recognizes transactions only when cash changes hands. In contrast, accrual basis accounting 132 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 132 of 2882 2 recognizes revenues when they are earned (but not necessarily received) and expenses when they are incurred (but not necessarily paid). This method of accounting recognizes transactions as they occur, regardless of whether cash has been exchanged. Receipts, disbursements, and cash balance are measured on a cash basis. The cash balance shows the total cash and investments in the City's accounts. The ending balance is the beginning balance plus receipts minus disbursements. Journal adjustments generally include transactions recorded in other systems and imported into New World, Council- approved budget adjustments, quarterly Cost Allocation Plan (CAP) charges, and quarterly interest earnings. Revenues, expenditures, and fund balance are measured on an accrual basis. As a result, the amount in fund balance does not mean the City has that much cash on hand. Instead, fund balance is the difference between assets and liabilities. The ending balance is the beginning balance plus revenues minus expenditures. Treasurer's Report The report provides an update on the City's cash and fund balances for February 2026. The report is as of April 1, 2026. Note: Beginning balances have been updated to account for any final adjustments made as part of the month-end close that could not be completed before the prior report’s preparation. These adjustments were necessary due to time constraints associated with completing the month-end close process and generating the report. Receipts, Disbursements, and Cash Balance The City's General Fund ending cash and investment balance was $201.4 million, decreasing by $0.4 million from the prior month. Receipts were $4.4 million, disbursements were $(5.3) million, and journal adjustments were $0.5 million for the month. The City's total ending cash and investment balance was $316.0 million, decreasing by $0.3 million from the prior month. Receipts were $4.7 million, disbursements were $(6.6) million, and journal adjustments were $1.7 million for the month. Journal adjustments included the following: • Parks and Recreation transactions imported from Active Network into New World • Worker’s Compensation journals • LAIF investment transfer • Investment Earnings • Bank Fees • Human Resources Department Reorg 133 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 133 of 2882 3 Fund Balance/Net Position The City's General Fund ending fund balance was $141.0 million, decreasing by $0.1 million from the prior month due to revenues of $5.0 million and expenditures of $5.2 million. The City's total ending fund balance was $244.2 million, decreasing by $27,772 from the prior month due to revenues of $6.5 million and expenditures of $6.5 million. Sustainability Impact No sustainability impact. Fiscal Impact No fiscal impact. California Environmental Quality Act Not applicable. _____________________________________ Prepared by: __________________ Jonathan Orozco Acting Director of Administrative Services and City Treasurer Approved for Submission by: __________________ Tina Kapoor Interim City Manager Attachments: A – Report of City-wide Receipts, Disbursements, and Cash Balances February 2026 B – Report of City-wide Fund Balances/Net Position February 2026 134 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 134 of 2882 February 2026 Report of City‐wide Receipts, Disbursements, and Cash Balances Cash and Investments (Unaudited) Beginning Balance Ending Balance Fund Type Fund Number/Name as of January 31, 2026 Receipts Disbursements Journal Adjustments as of February 28, 2026 General Fund 100 General Fund 201,800,347 12,164,627 (4,242,626) 120,630 209,842,979 General Fund 130 Investment Fund 643,830 ‐ ‐ 432,049 1,075,879 Special Revenue Funds 210 Storm Drain Improvement 151,297 ‐ ‐ 1 151,298 Special Revenue Funds 215 Storm Drain AB1600 2,323,857 5,279 ‐ 23 2,329,159 Special Revenue Funds 230 Env Mgmt Cln Crk Strm Drain 1,013,489 ‐ (108,165) 6 905,331 Special Revenue Funds 260 CDBG 542,248 122 (5,665) 8 536,714 Special Revenue Funds 261 HCD Loan Rehab 230,372 ‐ ‐ ‐ 230,372 Special Revenue Funds 265 BMR Housing 4,920,489 350 (84,798) 50 4,836,090 Special Revenue Funds 270 Transportation Fund 15,989,553 293,352 (259,138) (205,885) 15,817,881 Special Revenue Funds 271 Traffic Impact 930,830 6,797 ‐ 9 937,636 Special Revenue Funds 280 Park Dedication 21,227,642 15,000 ‐ 208 21,242,850 Special Revenue Funds 281 Tree Fund 77,312 ‐ ‐ 1 77,313 Debt Service Funds 365 Public Facilities Corp 2,436,800 ‐ (239,800) ‐ 2,197,000 Capital Project Funds 420 Capital Improvement Fund 36,788,186 ‐ (43,912) 61,348 36,805,622 Capital Project Funds 427 Stevens Creek Corridor Park 157,338 ‐ ‐ ‐ 157,338 Capital Project Funds 429 Capital Reserve*7,142,250 ‐ ‐ ‐ 7,142,250 Enterprise Funds 520 Resource Recovery 4,913,351 140,397 (173,968) 51 4,879,831 Enterprise Funds 560 Blackberry Farm 882,819 ‐ (47,221) 52,522 888,120 Enterprise Funds 570 Sports Center 1,649,855 ‐ (118,476) 66,839 1,598,218 Enterprise Funds 580 Recreation Program 3,031,891 7,055 (90,172) 107,225 3,055,998 Internal Service Funds 610 Innovation & Technology 2,928,268 106 (348,127) 30 2,580,277 Internal Service Funds 620 Workersʹ Compensation 3,959,080 ‐ (5,539) (27,594) 3,925,948 Internal Service Funds 630 Vehicle/Equip Replacement 1,164,081 ‐ (247,320) 12 916,773 Internal Service Funds 641 Compensated Absence/LTD 420,044 ‐ 335 5 420,384 Internal Service Funds 642 Retiree Medical 892,479 ‐ (149,821) 13 742,671 Total 316,217,707$ 12,633,085$ (6,164,412)$ 607,551$ 323,293,931$ * For reporting purposes, this fund rolls up/combines with Fund 420 Printed March 23, 2026 For more information on funds, please see cupertino.org/fund‐structure 13 5 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 135 of 2882 February 2026 Report of City‐wide Fund Balances/Net Position (Unaudited) Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance Fund Type Fund Number/Name as of January 31, 2026 Revenues Expenditures as of February 28, 2026 General Fund 100 General Fund 141,178,999 5,047,400 5,180,081 141,046,318 General Fund 130 Investment Fund 873,254 806,849 ‐ 1,680,104 Special Revenue Funds 210 Storm Drain Improvement 2,123,529 2 ‐ 2,123,531 Special Revenue Funds 215 Storm Drain AB1600 1,881,354 3,920 ‐ 1,885,274 Special Revenue Funds 230 Env Mgmt Cln Crk Strm Drai 1,961,180 48,726 83,413 1,926,493 Special Revenue Funds 260 CDBG 1,685,358 128 8,836 1,676,650 Special Revenue Funds 261 HCD Loan Rehab 222,016 ‐ ‐ 222,016 Special Revenue Funds 265 BMR Housing 9,568,777 414 47,994 9,521,197 Special Revenue Funds 270 Transportation Fund 10,728,088 143,805 136,321 10,735,572 Special Revenue Funds 271 Traffic Impact 772,538 12 ‐ 772,550 Special Revenue Funds 280 Park Dedication 18,785,733 15,277 69,617 18,731,393 Special Revenue Funds 281 Tree Fund 79,553 1,638 ‐ 81,191 Debt Service Funds 365 Public Facilities Corp 1,750 ‐ ‐ 1,750 Capital Project Funds 420 Capital Improvement Fund 23,429,539 ‐ 75,924 23,353,615 Capital Project Funds 427 Stevens Creek Corridor Park 157,343 ‐ ‐ 157,343 Capital Project Funds 429 Capital Reserve*13,744,638 ‐ ‐ 13,744,638 Enterprise Funds 520 Resource Recovery 4,827,611 158,680 115,496 4,870,795 Enterprise Funds 560 Blackberry Farm 673,520 42,299 64,799 651,020 Enterprise Funds 570 Sports Center 1,943,485 83,582 115,434 1,911,633 Enterprise Funds 580 Recreation Program 3,022,246 122,754 68,069 3,076,931 Internal Service Funds 610 Innovation & Technology 1,476,429 38 302,536 1,173,932 Internal Service Funds 620 Workersʹ Compensation 2,140,102 51 14,457 2,125,696 Internal Service Funds 630 Vehicle/Equip Replacement 2,429,024 15 55,164 2,373,875 Internal Service Funds 641 Compensated Absence/LTD 705,078 8,771 8,482 705,366 Internal Service Funds 642 Retiree Medical (167,549) 12 165,523 (333,060) Total 244,243,595$ 6,484,374$ 6,512,145$ 244,215,824$ * For reporting purposes, this fund rolls up/combines with Fund 42 Printed March 23, 2026 For more information on funds, please see cupertino.org/fund‐structure 13 6 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 136 of 2882 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item Subject:Consider adopting Resolution No. 26-034 to establish a Policy on Flags on City Property. Adopt Resolution No. 26-034 to establish a Policy on Flags on City Property. CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 4/3/2026Page 1 of 1 137 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 137 of 2882 CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3212 CUPERTINO.GOV CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Date: April 7, 2026 Subject Consider adopting Resolution No. 26-___ to establish a Policy on Flags on City Property Recommended Action Adopt Resolution No. 26-___ to establish a Policy on Flags on City Property Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options The City displays Federal, State, and City flags at various City facilities daily as well as commemorative flags from time to time. In 2023, staff created an administrative policy governing the display of commemorative flags on City property. While that policy provided direction for a specific category of flag displays, it did not address broader City practices related to the display of federal, state, and City flags, or other ceremonial uses. The absence of a unified policy has resulted in ambiguity regarding permissible flag displays across City facilities. To inform the development of this policy (Attachment A), staff reviewed flag policies from peer jurisdictions, including San Jose, to identify best practices in clarity, legal defensibility, and administrative implementation. The proposed policy establishes comprehensive guidelines governing two primary categories of flag displays on City property: • Federal, State, and City flags • Ceremonial and commemorative flags This policy ensures that the City remains compliant with federal and state laws including the U.S. Flag Code, and sets standards for the proper placement, order of precedence, and daily display of the United States, California State, and City of Cupertino flags across designated City facilities. The policy also formalizes procedures for recognized holidays and half-staff protocols. In addition, it defines commemorative flags as expressions of the City’s official sentiment and clarifies that it is not a forum for public expression. The policy requires City Council approval for any such display, thereby ensuring consistency, transparency, and adherence to legal standards in all flag-related practices. 138 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 138 of 2882 Sustainability Impact No sustainability impact. Fiscal Impact No fiscal impact. City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description None Council Goal Public Engagement and Transparency California Environmental Quality Act No California Environmental Quality Act impact. _____________________________________ Prepared by: Astrid Robles, Senior Management Analyst Reviewed by: Kirsten Squarcia, Deputy City Manager Floy Andrews, Interim City Attorney Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager Attachments: A – Draft Resolution B – Draft Policy on Flags on City Property 139 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 139 of 2882 RESOLUTION NO. ________ A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL TO ESTABLISH A POLICY ON FLAGS ON CITY PROPERTY WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino desires to establish clear and consistent guidelines for the display of the flag of the United States of America, the California State flag, and the Cupertino City flag; and WHEREAS, the City also seeks to define the protocols for the display of ceremonial and commemorative flags at designated locations, including the Cupertino Civic Center, the Cupertino Service Center, and the Memorial Park Veterans Monument; and WHEREAS, the City adheres to the standards set forth in the Federal “Our Flag” publication, the U.S. Flag Code (4 U.S.C. Title 4), and the State of California Government Code Sections 430 and 437; and WHEREAS, this 2026 Flag Policy is intended to replace and repeal the previous 2023 Commemorative Flag administrative policy. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby Adopt a new Policy on Flags on City Property to establish clear, consistent, and legally compliant guidelines governing the display of flags on City property. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of April, 2026, by the following vote: Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 140 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 140 of 2882 Resolution No. __________________ Page 2 SIGNED: ___________ Kitty Moore, Mayor City of Cupertino ________________________ Date ATTEST: _____________ Lauren Sapudar, City Clerk ________________________ Date 141 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 141 of 2882 Policy on Flags on City Property Citywide Policy Manual Policy # Attachments: Effective Date: April 7, 2026 Responsible Department: City Manager’s Office Related Policies & Notes: This policy repeals and replaces the 2023 Commemorative Flag administrative policy Purpose The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for the display of (A) the exhibition of the flag of the United States of America, the California State flag, the Cupertino City flag, , and (B) the display of ceremonial/commemorative flags at the Cupertino Civic Center, the Cupertino Service Center, and the Memorial Park Veterans Monument at Memorial Park. Policy It is the policy of the City of Cupertino that flags should be displayed in conformance with Federal and State policies, as stated in the Federal “Our Flag” publication of the Congress, House Document No. 96-144 and the U.S. Flag Code (4 U.S.C. Title 4).; and the State of California Government Code Sections 430 and 437. To establish a policy with respect to the locations and days when the United States of America, California State, and Cupertino City flags should be displayed, the following standards should be followed. The City Manager, or designee, is responsible for ensuring the proper execution of this policy. Standards A. Federal, State and City Flags 1. Outdoor flags will be flown in the following order of precedence: first, the United States flag; second, the California State flag; and third, the Cupertino City flag. The Prisoner-of-War/Missing-in-Action (“POW/MIA”) flag will be flown at the Veteran’s Memorial Monument. 2. When flown alongside the flag of another country, the U.S. flag will remain at full staff and in the center. Both the U.S. flag and the foreign flag shall be of equal size and height, with the foreign flag positioned to the left and the California flag to the right. 142 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 142 of 2882 3. For ceremonial or commemorative flag raisings, as approved by Council, the City of Cupertino flag may be lowered, and the ceremonial flag added as a second flag. The U.S. and State flags shall remain in place and unchanged. 4. Weather permitting, flags should be displayed daily in front of the locations specified in this policy. 5. Flags should not be displayed in inclement weather. However, all-weather flags may be flown on a 24-hour basis as long as they are illuminated from sunset to sunrise. The City Hall flags shall be all-weather flags, shall be flown on a 24-hour basis and shall be illuminated at night. 6. The Cupertino City flag will be flown wherever there are sufficient poles to do so in accordance with this policy. The City flag may be displayed on the same pole as, and underneath the State flag, whenever the pole is of sufficient height. The Federal, State, and City flags shall not be flown on a single pole of any height. 7. Unless otherwise directed by Federal and/or State authorities; on recognized Federal and/or State holidays and on other special occasions as listed below, flags should be flown as specified in this policy from all City-owned flagpole locations. a. January 1, New Year’s Day b. January 20, (2001, 2005, 2009, etc., every fourth year) on the day the President of the United States is inaugurated c. Third Monday in January, Martin Luther King’s birthday d. Third Monday in February, Presidents’ Day e. Second Sunday in May, Mother’s Day f. Third Saturday in May, Armed Services Day g. Last Monday in May, Memorial Day. The flags to be flown at half-staff (first raise to top, then slowly lower to half-staff) until noon and at full staff from noon until sunset. NOTE: The United States flag must always be flown by itself when displayed at half-staff. h. Third Sunday in June, Father’s Day i. June 14, Flag Day j. July 4, Independence Day k. First Monday in September, Labor Day l. September 9, Admission Day m. September 17, Constitution Day n. Second Monday in October, Columbus Day o. The first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of a presidential election year and gubernatorial election days p. November 11, Veteran’s Day q. Fourth Thursday in November, Thanksgiving Day 143 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 143 of 2882 r. December 25, Christmas Day s. State holidays t. Special occasions of Federal, State and local proclamation 8. Flags at any City-owned flagpole locations shall be displayed in accordance with the above standards. However, the City Manager may order flags to be lowered to half- staff including but not limited to flags of the United States of America and State of California in honor of the death of a City employee. B. Commemorative Flags A commemorative flag is any flag other than the United States flag, the State of California flag, or the City of Cupertino flag. The display of commemorative flags on City property serves solely as an expression of the City’s official sentiment and are not intended to serve as a forum for free expression by the public. The City maintains exclusive control over the decision to display commemorative flags on City property, and no commemorative flag may be displayed without approval by the City Council. 144 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 144 of 2882 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item Subject: Approval of a resolution to authorize application for the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant operated by the Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project. Adopt Resolution No. 26-035 of the City Council authorizing the City to apply for funds through the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant Operated by The Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project. CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 4/3/2026Page 1 of 1 145 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 145 of 2882 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3220 CUPERTINO.GOV CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Date: April 7, 2026 Subject Approval of a resolution to authorize application for the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant operated by the Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project. Recommended Action Adopt Resolution No. 26-____ of the City Council authorizing the City to apply for funds through the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant Operated by The Santa Clara Valley Water District (Valley Water) for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project. Background The City proposes seeking $500,000 in grant funds to implement critical components of the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project. The funds will be sought through application submission for the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant operated by Valley Water. Valley Water is a public agency providing water supply, flood risk reduction, and stream stewardship for Santa Clara County (County). The grant opportunity funds shovel- ready capital and implementation projects for creek restoration; water conservation infrastructure; enhanced wetland habitats; and removing non-native, invasive plant species and planting native species. Valley Water requires all applicants to obtain authorization for application from the applicant governing body. The City has developed a conceptual plan for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail project which reflects community input and the goals laid out in the City’s 2020 Parks and Recreation System Master Plan. On June 11, 2024, the Parks and Recreation Commission considered the proposed final conceptual design and made a favorable recommendation to the City Council, as required by CMC section 19.92.040. The Final Conceptual Plan was approved by City Council at the July 2, 2024 meeting and is reflective of the following considerations: • Represents directives received to date from the community, commissions, and City Council; 146 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 146 of 2882 • Is consistent with the Goals, Policies, and Strategies of the General Plan and the Parks and Recreation System Master Plan; • Will not have signiﬁcant negative impact on the environment; and • Provides the design intent for the future phases of design and construction of the park and trail. • The Final Conceptual Design includes an extension of the Saratoga Creek/San Tomas Aquino trail, as well as nature play areas, native plant species, and picnic groves among other features. On May 1, 2025, an update on this project was presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission, and subsequently the Public Works Department presented an informational memorandum update to City Council on July 24, 2025. The full project budget approved by City Council on June 2, 2015, is $8,270,994, with an additional $910,000 appropriation being approved on March 8, 2022, for a total project budget of $9,180,994. City staff anticipate applying for $500,000 in grant funding that, if awarded, will be available to expend within a 5-year timeframe from contract execution with Valley Water. The grant requires a 15% match that will be accounted for via the existing appropriation approved in June 2015. Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options Valley Water requires all grant applicants to provide written evidence of authorization to apply for the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program 2026 Standard Grant and recommends use of standard resolution language. Staff presents this request to Council due to the granting agency requirement. The Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project received broad public support, Parks and Recreation Commission support for the design presented in May 2025, and approval from Council. Throughout the development of the design, the City solicited public input via surveys, site pop-ups, community meetings, and presented at numerous commission meetings, and to the City Council, to gather input and ideas on the park's design and amenities. By applying for grant funds to offset the project budget, the City pursues external funding to advance priority project elements, while remaining responsive to public enthusiasm for this project. The recommendation to authorize application for grant funds through the Valley Water Standard Grants Program will allow staff to implement project elements with existing CEQA approval. Should Council not authorize application for grant funds, the City declines an opportunity to pursue a valuable funding opportunity to offset costs for a Council approved project. For these reasons, staff recommend authorization of application for grant funds. Sustainability Impact Approving a resolution to apply for grant funds will help the Project advance the Climate Action Plan 2.0 goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by improving walkability and expanding green spaces. Fiscal Impact 147 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 147 of 2882 Approving this resolution to apply for grant funds positions the City to enter a competitive proposal process and if funded, accepting the grant reduces the City’s cost for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail Project by $500,000. City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description FY22-23 Lawrence Mitty Park Implementation Plan: Development project for Lawrence Mitty will be included in the CIP. Council Goal: Fiscal Strategy, Quality of Life California Environmental Quality Act The CEQA Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Lawrence-Mitty Park and Trail project is completed and filed with the County. The Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program was prepared and approved per state guidelines. Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15064(f)(3) and 15070(b), a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for consideration as the appropriate CEQA document for the project. A mitigated negative declaration was adopted, and there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. Grant application itself is exempt from CEQA. _____________________________________ Prepared by: Veena Raghavan, Grants Analyst Reviewed by: Jonathan Orozco, Acting Director of Administrative Services Chad Mosley, Director of Public Works Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager Attachments: A – Draft Resolution B – Sample FY26 Standard Grant Agreement Template 148 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 148 of 2882 RESOLUTION NO. 26-14957 A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL TO AUTHORIZE APPLICATION FOR THE SAFE, CLEAN WATER AND NATURAL FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM 2026 STANDARD GRANT OPERATED BY THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT (VALLEY WATER) This resolution authorizes City of Cupertino staff to complete and submit an application for the 2026 Standard Grant Program under Valley Water to advance capital projects, for the Lawrence Mitty Park and Trail project (Project). WHEREAS, Valley Water has enacted the 2026 Standard Grants Program - FY2026 Safe Clean Water Grant Program (Safe Clean Water), which provides funds for Implementation (Program) Grants; and WHEREAS, Valley Water’s Office of Civic Engagement has been delegated the responsibility for the administration of the grant program, and establishing necessary implementation procedures; and WHEREAS, said procedures established by Valley Water require Applicant’s Governing Body to certify by resolution Applicant’s approval to apply for and accept grant program funds; and WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino (Applicant) intends to enter into a Grant Agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Water District should grant funds be awarded; and l NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby: 1. Approve the submission of an application for the 2026 Standard Grants Program under Valley Water, from the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program; 2. Approve the acceptance of grant funds from the 2026 Standard Grants Program under Valley Water, from the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program, upon approval of grant funding for the Project by appropriate authorities; 3. Certify that the City of Cupertino has or will have sufficient funds to operate and maintain the Project beyond the grant funding term; 4. Certify that Applicant will maintain an accounting system that: 149 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 149 of 2882 Resolution No. 26-14957 Page 2 a. Accurately reflects fiscal transactions, with the necessary controls and safeguards; b. Provides good audit trails, especially the source documents; and c. Provides accounting data so the total cost of the project can be readily determined. 5. Certify that Applicant will review and agree to all terms and conditions stated in the Agreement including the Special Provisions, General Provisions, Financial Provisions, and Insurance Requirements contained in the Agreement; and 6. Appoint the City Manager or designee as its authorized agent to conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all documents and reports including, but not limited to applications, agreements, payment requests and so on, which may be necessary for the performance and completion of the Project. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of April, 2026, by the following vote: Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ___________ Kitty Moore, Mayor City of Cupertino ________________________ Date _____________ Lauren Sapudar, City Clerk ________________________ Date 150 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 150 of 2882 SAFE, CLEAN WATER AND NATURAL FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM PROJECT F9 STANDARD GRANT AGREEMENT Terms and Conditions Template (11-05-24) FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 1 of 25 This FY Select fiscal year Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program (Safe, Clean Water Program) Project F9 Standard Grant Agreement (Agreement), effective on the date stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information, is entered into by and between the Santa Clara Valley Water District, a California special district (Valley Water) and Legal Name of Grantee (Grantee). Valley Water and Grantee may be referred to individually as a Party or collectively as the Parties. This Agreement provides for funding to support Grantee’s Project Name Project (Project). RECITALS A. Valley Water’s mission is to provide Silicon Valley safe, clean water for a healthy life, environment, and economy. B. In November 2012, the voters of Santa Clara County passed Measure B establishing a special tax to fund the Safe, Clean Water Program. In November 2020, the voters of Santa Clara County passed Measure S renewing the special tax until ended by voters. C. The Safe, Clean Water Program special tax provides funding for activities focused on the priorities stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information. D. The Grantee’s Board of Directors adopted a Resolution authorizing Grantee’s application for Safe, Clean Water Grant Program funding and acceptance of the grant, if awarded (see Appendix E, Resolution). E. Grantee submitted an application to Valley Water’s Grant Program for its Project to carry out the scope as stated in Appendix B, Project Scope. F. On the Award Date stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information, Valley Water’s Board of Directors authorized Valley Water’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO), following CEQA compliance, to approve and execute a grant agreement with Grantee to fund the Project in the amount not-to-exceed the Grant Amount stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information. G. Consistent with its application submitted, Grantee has secured funding from Valley Water in the amount specified above and any additional funds necessary to complete the Project will be provided by the Grantee. The Parties agree to the following terms and conditions: SECTION 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS A. Definitions 1. Acquisition: to obtain fee title or a lesser interest in real property, including a conservation easement or development rights. 2. Agreement: this contract between Valley Water and the Grantee specifying the payment of funds by Valley Water for the performance of the Project Scope within the Project Performance Period by the Grantee. 151 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 151 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 2 of 25 3. Application: the Safe, Clean Water Program Standard Grant application and accompanying attachments submitted to Valley Water. 4. Development: the creation, by construction of or addition to existing facilities, of new watershed activities at the Project site. 5. Grant Program: Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program (Safe, Clean Water Program). 6. Project: Grantee’s Project as described in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information and Appendix B, Project Scope, approved for a grant award by Valley Water’s Board of Directors. 7. Project Completion: Project completion per requirements stated in Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion. 8. Project Grant Amount: the amount of Grant funds allocated by Valley Water’s Board to Grantee for the Project. 9. Project Performance Period: the Project period commencing either upon full execution of this Agreement by both Parties or retroactively as stated in the first paragraph of this Agreement and expiring as stated in Section 1. General Provisions, H. Agreement Term. 10. Property: the real property described in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information, for acquisition or development with the Project. 11. Safe, Clean Water Program: Valley Water’s Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program special tax approved by Santa Clara County voters in November 2012 and renewed by the voters in November 2020. 12. Total Project Cost: the full cost of the Project, including funds from all funding sources, as identified in Appendix D, Project Budget. 13. Valley Water: Santa Clara Valley Water District. B. Project Execution 1. Valley Water hereby grants to Grantee the Project Grant Amount, in consideration of, and on condition that, the sum be expended for the sole purpose of carrying out the objectives as set forth in the Project as identified in Appendix B, Project Scope, consistent with the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. 2. Grantee is responsible for securing all other necessary funds to accomplish the Project. Any significant modification or alteration to the Project Scope is subject to prior consideration and approval by Valley Water. Such a request must be submitted in writing to the Valley Water Contact, per Section 4. Miscellaneous Provisions, B. Notices, of this Agreement. Valley Water’s disbursement of Grant funds is dependent on Valley Water approval of changes Valley Water deems are significant. 152 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 152 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 3 of 25 3. Grantee will complete the Project in accordance with Appendix A, Grant and Project Information, Appendix B, Project Scope, Appendix C, Project Schedule, and Appendix D, Project Budget. 4. Project Scope, Project Schedule, and Project Budget may only be adjusted pursuant to a written amendment to this Agreement, signed by both Grantee and Valley Water in advance of such adjustment. a. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Project Schedule adjustments that do not impact the completion of the Project Scope prior to the expiration date of this Agreement; an adjustment of the amount budgeted for a task that is not more than 10% of that budgeted amount; and does not result in an increase of total grant amount specified in Recital F. of this Agreement, may be approved by the Valley Water Program Administrator in writing but without a formal amendment to this Agreement. b. If there is an increase in the amount budgeted for a task, there must be a correlating simultaneous decrease of the same amount to another task(s) to ensure the total Project Grant Amount specified in Recital F. is not exceeded. 5. Compliance with All Laws a. Grantee must comply with all applicable federal, state, and local codes, statutes, laws, regulations, and ordinances, including, but not limited to, financial requirements, legal requirements for construction contracts, building codes, health and safety codes, laws and codes pertaining to individuals with disabilities, and Guidelines and Standards for Land Use Near Streams (which can be found at https://www.valleywater.org/contractors/doing-businesses-with-the-district /permits-for-working-on-district-land-or-easement/guidelines-and-standard s-for-land-use-near-streams). b. CEQA Compliance (1) (STANDARD CEQA) If the Grantee is a public agency, the Grantee will be the lead agency for purposes of complying with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In that case, the Grantee shall complete the CEQA review process and submit required documentation to Valley Water prior to Valley Water disbursing any grant funds. (2) (STANDARD CEQA) If the Grantee is a non-governmental entity and if no other public agency shall be the CEQA lead agency pursuant to section 15051 of the CEQA Guidelines, Valley Water will be the lead agency for purposes of CEQA. Valley Water may request that the Grantee provide environmental information about the Project to assist Valley Water’s CEQA review. The disbursing of the grant funds is contingent upon Valley Water’s completion of the CEQA review. (3) The required CEQA documentation must include one of the following: a notice of exemption filed with the Santa Clara County 153 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 153 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 4 of 25 Office of the Clerk/Recorder (Clerk) in the case of an exempt project, or otherwise an environmental impact report, mitigated negative declaration or negative declaration along with a copy of the notice of determination filed with the County Clerk. (4) Grantee shall fulfill all the lead agency responsibilities, including consultation with Valley Water and any other applicable responsible agencies. The disbursing of grant funds is contingent on Valley Water completing CEQA review, if required, as a responsible agency. c. For projects subject to CEQA review by Valley Water, Valley Water has not committed to a definite course of action by executing this Agreement and is not limited in any way in exercising any discretion with respect to the Project, including but not limited to (1) considering other feasible alternatives and mitigation measures to avoid or minimize Project impacts, (2) requiring Grantee to make such modifications deemed necessary to reduce Project impacts, or (3) determining not to proceed with one or more component of the Project. 6. Grantee must have access rights to perform onsite Tasks, if any, as described in Appendix B, Project Scope; Appendix C, Project Schedule; and Appendix D, Project Budget, on real property it does not own. Written permission must be secured prior to Grantee’s performance of onsite Tasks. Documentation of such permission must be made available to Valley Water upon its request. a. Acceptable types of Grantee’s real property access rights include: (1) Fee title; (2) Leasehold or other rental agreement arrangement; (3) Easement (temporary or permanent); (4) Permit for site access such as a permit to enter (including, if applicable, a Valley Water encroachment permit to access Valley Water real property or easement area(s)); or (5) Other type of written permission (such as by hard or soft copy communication), documenting Grantee’s real property access rights necessary for Grantee’s performance of this Agreement. 7. Grantee must either be issued an encroachment permit by Valley Water or enter into a Joint Use Agreement for use of any Valley Water property, prior to execution of this Grant Agreement, or prior to reimbursement of grant funds for this Project, at Valley Water’s discretion. However, nothing shall alter any preexisting right the Grantee may have. 8. Grantee must provide metadata for spatial data required for identifying the location and alignment of the Project site per Valley Water’s Geographical Information System data standards. 154 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 154 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 5 of 25 C. Project Administration/Reporting Requirements 1. Grantee shall provide written quarterly reports (on a fiscal year schedule), using the Valley Water’s Grant Status Report Form. Reports will be completed and submitted in conjunction with invoicing as appropriate. Status reports shall include an update per task as included in Appendix B, Project Scope. 2. Grantee shall provide one hard copy and one electronic version of items listed in Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion. 3. All reports submitted to Valley Water must include the following certification page signed by an officer of Grantee’s organization: “I certify, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the Quarterly/Monthly Status Report and all attachments, signed on the date below, on behalf of Grantee, were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to ensure that qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the loss of the current and future Grant Funding.” 4. Quarterly and final reporting will end with submittal of Project Completion packet (see Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion). D. Termination of this Agreement 1. Either Grantee or Valley Water may unilaterally terminate this Agreement at any time by providing 30 days written notice to the other Party. 2. Failure by Grantee to comply with the terms of this Agreement may be cause for suspension or termination of funding by Valley Water. Additionally, in the event of failure to complete Project, Grantee may be required to repay Valley Water for funds received, including interest earned at Valley Water’s pooled portfolio monthly interest yield corresponding to the month(s) the funds were due to Valley Water. E. Indemnification 1. In lieu of and notwithstanding the pro rata risk allocation, which might otherwise be imposed between the Parties pursuant to Government Code Section 895.6, the Parties agree that all losses or liabilities incurred by a Party shall not be shared pro rata but, instead, Valley Water and Grantee agree that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, each of the Parties hereto shall fully indemnify and hold each of the other Parties, their officers, board members, employees, and agents, harmless from any claim, expense or cost, damage or liability imposed for injury (as defined in Government Code 810.8) occurring by reason of the negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of the indemnifying Party, its officers, employees, or agents, under or in connection with or arising out of any 155 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 155 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 6 of 25 work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to such Party under this Agreement. No party, nor any officer, board member, employees, or agent thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of the negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of the other Party hereto, its officers, board members, employees, or agents, under or in connection with or arising out of any work authority or jurisdiction delegated to such other Party under this Agreement. The rights, duties, and obligations of the Parties as set forth above in this paragraph E. Indemnification, survive completion, termination, expiration, and suspension of this Agreement. F. Equal Opportunity 1. Valley Water is an equal opportunity employer and requires its Grantee to have and adhere to a policy of equal opportunity and non-discrimination. In the performance of the Agreement, Grantee will comply with all applicable federal, state, local laws and regulations, and will not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee, or applicant for employment in the recruitment, hiring, employment, utilization, promotion, classification or reclassification, transfer, recruitment advertising, evaluation, treatment, demotion, layoff, termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selection for professional development training (including apprenticeship), or against any other person, on the basis of sex (which includes pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding and medical conditions related to pregnancy, childbirth, or breastfeeding), race, religion, color, national origin (including language use restrictions), ancestry, religious creed (including religious dress and grooming practices), political affiliation, disability (mental and physical, including HIV or AIDS), medical condition (cancer and genetic characteristics), genetic information, marital status, parental status, gender, age (40 and over), pregnancy, military and veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, the exercise of family and medical care leave, the exercise of pregnancy disability leave, or the request, exercise, or need for reasonable accommodation. 2. Grantee’s policy must be in conformance with applicable state and federal guidelines including the Federal Equal Opportunity Clause, 41 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 60-1, §60-1.4; Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (§503 and §504); the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 U.S.C. §6101 et seq.); the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code §12900 et. seq.); and California Labor Code §1101 and §1102. 3. Grantee must designate a specific position within its organization to be responsible for investigating allegations of non-compliance with the anti- discrimination and anti-harassment provisions of this Agreement. Grantee must conduct a fair, prompt, and thorough investigation of all allegations directed to Grantee by Valley Water. In cases where such investigation results in a finding of discrimination, harassment, or hostile work environment, Grantee must take prompt, effective action against the offender. G. Project Completion 1. After Grantee completes the Project by meeting all requirements stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information, Grantee must submit the Project 156 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 156 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 7 of 25 Completion packet detailed in a. – f. below to the Valley Water Contact and it must include: a. Final Payment Request Form; b. Sample Project Invoice Template; c. Final Grant Status Report Form, including documentation of accomplishments; d. Notice of Completion for public works construction projects; e. Written communication from Grantee stating that Project is complete, including list of tasks completed and signature by authorized representative; and f. Presentation to the Valley Water Board of Directors on completed Project. Valley Water will provide Grantee with approximate Board presentation date prior to expiration of the Agreement Term. Alternatively, Valley Water may require a final report which includes a presentation file and a factsheet be posted on Grantee’s website and which Valley Water may post on its own website. 2. Valley Water conducts final on-site Project inspection as it deems necessary, if appropriate. 3. Valley Water processes Grantee’s invoice for final payment. H. Agreement Term 1. Provided Valley Water has approved of Grantee’s compliance with all Insurance Requirements as set forth in Appendix F, Insurance Requirements, the term of this Agreement commences on the Agreement Effective Date stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information. 2. Approval of this Agreement by both Parties is necessary for any disbursement of Grant funds. 3. This Agreement expires upon the earliest of: Project Completion in accordance with Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion or Agreement Expiration Date stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information. I. Insurance Provisions 1. During the entire term of the Agreement, Grantee must maintain the insurance coverages described in Appendix F, Insurance Requirements. SECTION 2. SPECIAL PROVISIONS A. Within the Project Performance Period, Grantee will mention the Project and Valley Water’s Safe, Clean Water Program as a funding source in at least one article published in any newspaper, magazine, e-newsletter or social media that the Grantee issues or submits materials to for publication. 157 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 157 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 8 of 25 B. Grantee shall post signs acknowledging Valley Water’s participation in the development of the Project and the use of Safe, Clean Water Program funds, should there be an implementation component. Grantee will include the Valley Water logo in all collateral materials identifying Valley Water as a funding source for the development of those materials. Valley Water to provide sign template(s) and logo(s) to Grantee, upon request, for use in Project where feasible. C. Grantee shall invite, in writing, members of the Valley Water Board to participate in any groundbreaking, opening, or ribbon-cutting ceremony associated with the Project. Board members will be given the opportunity to speak if other elected officials have speaking roles. Grantee will notify Valley Water at least two (2) weeks prior to the ceremony. D. After Project completion, Grantee, upon Valley Water request, will make a presentation at a Valley Water Board meeting or other venue within Santa Clara County. E. Public Access to Completed Project. Project will be open to members of the public generally during hours specified by the Grantee, except as noted in the Special Provisions of this Agreement, pursuant to provisions of the enabling legislation and/or Program, or any joint use agreement with Valley Water. SECTION 3. FINANCIAL PROVISIONS A. Accounting and Audit Requirements 1. Grantee must maintain an accounting system that accurately reflects fiscal transactions, with the necessary controls and safeguards. Grantee should provide clear audit trails, especially the source of original documents such as, but not limited to, receipts, progress payments, invoices, timecards, etc. AVOID AUDIT EXCEPTIONS – KEEP ACCURATE RECORDS. 2. Grantee agrees that Valley Water and its agent(s) have the right to review, obtain, and copy all records pertaining to performance of this Agreement. Grantee agrees to provide Valley Water and its agent(s), with any relevant information requested, in electronic and hard copy format, at Valley Water’s discretion, and will permit Valley Water and its agent(s), access to Grantee’s premises, upon reasonable notice, during normal business hours, for the purpose of interviewing Grantee’s employees (alternatively, by phone) and inspecting or copying books, records, accounts, computerized records, and other materials that may be relevant to the matter under investigation for the purpose of determining compliance with this Agreement. Grantee further agrees to maintain such records for a period of three (3) years after final payment made in accordance with this Agreement. 3. Grantee’s detailed budget is included as Appendix D, Project Budget and is consistent with Grantee’s Project Proposal. The Project Budget will be used by Valley Water as the basis for evaluating Grantee’s invoices for Grant funds. In cases where invoices are inconsistent with the Project Budget, invoices must either be revised for consistency or an amendment to this Agreement may be necessary to align the Project Budget with the actual reimbursable expenditures for the Project. 4. Grantee must document its eligibility for award and receipt of Safe, Clean Water Grant Funds by verifying it is not included in any current Federal List of Parties 158 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 158 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 9 of 25 Excluded from Federal Procurement or Non-procurement Programs. Exclusion of Grantee from this list, verified at: http://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/compliance/preaward/debarlst.htm, demonstrates the Grantee’s good status regarding suspension and debarment and eligibility for Safe, Clean Water Grant Program funds. 5. Grantee is responsible for repayment to Valley Water of any disallowed cost. Disallowed costs may be identified through audits, monitoring, or other sources of information that become available to Valley Water after Valley Water has satisfied an invoice from Grantee and disbursed Safe, Clean Water Grant funds. 6. Construction costs are deemed “reasonable” if obtained by competitive bidding, or by other legal means as demonstrated by Grantee. B. Eligible Costs 1. Total Project Grant Amount is not-to-exceed the amount stated in Recital F. and will be disbursed to Grantee according to the terms and conditions as stated in Section 3. Financial Provisions, C. Payment Request Process and D. Invoicing. 2. Only Project-related costs incurred during the Project Performance Period, excluding costs incurred prior to and during preparation of the Grant application, specified in this Agreement are eligible for reimbursement. All such costs must be supported by appropriate documentation, including but not limited to subcontractor invoices and receipts. 3. Personnel or Employee Services. Services of the Grantee’s employees engaged in Project execution are eligible costs. These direct labor costs must be computed according to the Grantee’s prevailing wage or salary scales and may include a loaded hourly rate, consisting of indirect overhead and fringe benefit costs such as vacation, sick leave and social security contributions that are customarily charged to the Grantee’s various projects for which the Grantee has submitted a Loaded Hourly Rate Calculation to Valley Water. Costs charged to the Project must be computed on actual time spent on a project and supported by time and attendance records describing the work performed on the Project. Overtime costs may be allowed under the Grantee’s established policy, provided that the regular work time was devoted to the same Project. 4. Salaries and wages claimed for employees working on Grant-funded Project(s) must not exceed the Grantee’s established rates for similar positions. 5. Project costs for non-construction tasks are limited to 20% of Valley Water contribution to Total Project Cost, for projects that include a construction task. 6. Consultant Services. The costs of consultant services necessary for the Project are eligible. Consultants must be paid by the customary or established method and rate of the Grantee. No consultant fee may be paid to the Grantee’s own employees. 7. Construction Equipment. Equipment owned by Grantee may be charged to the Project for each use. Equipment-use charges must be made in accordance with the Grantee’s normal accounting practices. The equipment rental rates published by the California Department of Transportation may be used as a guide. 159 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 159 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 10 of 25 a. If the Grantee’s equipment is used, a report or source document must describe the work performed, indicate the hours used and relate the use to the Project. b. The purchase of equipment with Grant funds is not permissible. 8. Construction Supplies and Materials. Supplies and materials may be purchased for a specific project or may be drawn from a central stock, provided they are claimed at a cost no higher than that paid by the grant recipient. Supplies and materials purchased for the construction of a piece of equipment, a structure or a part of a structure may be charged to the Project. If charged, only that cost incurred during the Project performance period and attributed to the Project may be claimed. 9. Signs and Interpretive Aids. The cost of signs, display boards, or other minor interpretive aids relating to the Project are eligible. 10. Construction. The costs of all necessary construction activities, from site preparation (including demolition, excavation, grading, etc.) to the completion of a structure or facility are eligible. 11. Acquisition. Costs of acquiring real property interests are eligible and may include the purchase price of the property, appraisals, surveys, preliminary title reports, escrow fees, title insurance fees. 12. Relocation Costs. Relocation costs are allowable for projects that result in displacement of any person and/or business. The Grantee must comply with all federal and local laws, as well as the requirements of the State Relocation Act (Chapter 16 Government Code §7260 et seq.), if applicable, even if relocation costs are not claimed for reimbursement. 13. Other Expenditures. In addition to the major categories of expenditures, reimbursements may be made for miscellaneous costs necessary for execution of the Project. Examples of such costs include: a. Postage; and b. Transportation costs for moving equipment and/or personnel. (REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) C. Payment Request Process 1. This Grant Agreement is based on a reimbursement model with specific details as noted below: a. Grantee may submit multiple Payment Request Forms as necessary, but not more often than monthly. b. After Grantee completes the Project, Grantee submits the Project Completion Packet (see Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion) and the Payment Request Form for the final payment. 160 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 160 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 11 of 25 PAYMENT REQUEST PROCESS Payment Type When to Supporting Documentation to Payment Request Reimbursement (up to 90% of the total Project Grant Amount) Once Grantee can provide evidence to show significant progress toward completing Project tasks • Payment Request Form • Project Invoice Template • Grant Status Report Form • For direct expenses, copies of invoices with all attachments shall be submitted • For labor costs, copies of timesheets shall be submitted • For Benefits Costs, a Benefits Rate Calculation will be submitted • Documentation of accomplishments (i.e., draft and final plans, designs, etc.) Final (10%) After Grantee has completed the Project • Project Completion packet (see Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion) D. Invoicing 1. The Project Invoice shall accompany the Payment Request Form and shall incorporate Grantee name and remittance address, a description/itemization of goods or services, dollar amount of goods or services, invoice date and number, and Agreement number. Work performed shall be determined on a per task basis as outlined in the Project Scope (Appendix B) and Project Schedule (Appendix C). All requests for reimbursements will be accompanied by materials providing evidence of significant Project progress accomplishments commensurate with level of reimbursement requested. 2. Valley Water will review Grantee’s invoice within ten working days from receipt and advise Grantee of any disputed items. Valley Water will review and approve undisputed invoices within ten working days from receipt and issue payment within thirty (30) calendar days from receipt. Valley Water will pay invoices within thirty (30) calendar days from date invoice is approved by Valley Water’s Program Administrator. 3. Grantee’s invoice must include invoices from subcontractors documenting task, task budget, percentage complete, prior billing if any, current billing, and total billed. Documentation supporting Grantee’s invoice(s) must document work performed consistent with the frequency of Grantee’s invoices to Valley Water. 4. Failure to submit an accurate financial invoice in a timely manner may result in payments being withheld, delayed, or denied, and will result in payment delays. SECTION 4. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS A. Miscellaneous Provisions 1. Grantee’s waiver of any term, condition, covenant, or breach of any term, condition or covenant shall not be construed as a waiver of any other term, condition, or covenant or breach by any other term, condition, or covenant. 161 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 161 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 12 of 25 2. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between Valley Water and Grantee relating to the Project. Any prior agreements, promises, negotiations, or representations not expressly set forth in this Agreement are of no force or effect. 3. The Parties agree that this Agreement is to be governed, construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The Parties also agree that the venue of any litigation arising out of or connected with this Agreement will lie exclusively in the state trial court or Federal District Court located in Santa Clara County in the State of California. The Parties consent to jurisdiction over their persons and over the subject matter of any such litigation in such courts, and consent to service of process issued by such courts. 4. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which, when executed and delivered, will be deemed to be an original; which taken together will be deemed to be the one and same instrument; and will be binding as executed. 5. Grantee’s request(s) for minor modification(s) to the Grant and Project Information, Project Scope, Project Schedule, or Project Budget must be submitted in writing, prior to the expiration of this Agreement, and will be considered for approval by Valley Water Program Administrator responsible for the Safe, Clean Water Grant Program provided: a. The Grant award by Valley Water’s Board did not impose a restriction on such revisions; and b. No additional Grant funds are requested. All such requests will be considered by Valley Water’s executive management responsible for the Safe, Clean Water Grant Program. 6. Revisions to the Project Scope, Project Schedule, or Project Budget are subject to review and prior approval of Valley Water. 7. An extension to the term of this Agreement for a period up to twelve (12) months beyond the current expiration date may be approved by Valley Water. Requests for term extensions must be submitted in writing and received no later than sixty (60) calendar days prior to the expiration of this Agreement. Grantee must submit sufficient documentation in support of its request to enable Valley Water’s executive management to evaluate Grantee’s request. Valley Water’s executive management will consider criteria such as the following: a. The amount of Grant funds not yet disbursed to Grantee; b. Grantee’s progress in completing the Project Scope and the reasons supporting any delays; c. Whether Grantee has the dedicated human and financial resources to continue to complete the Project Scope during the extension period; and d. Whether such extension is in the best interest of Valley Water. 8. If approved by Valley Water, an amendment to this Agreement, extending its Term, must be executed in full prior to the original expiration date as stated in Section 1. General Provisions, H. Agreement Term. If this Agreement is not 162 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 162 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 13 of 25 extended prior to its expiration, any unexpended Grant funds will be retained by Valley Water and unavailable to the Grantee for the Project. 9. All Appendices, A (Grant and Project Information), B (Project Scope), C (Project Schedule), D (Project Budget), E (Resolution), and F (Insurance Requirements) are hereby incorporated herein by this reference and made a part hereof, as though set forth in full. 10. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions of the Agreement which can be given effect without the invalid provision, and to this end the provisions of this Agreement are severable. 11. Survival. Section 3. Financial Provisions, B. Eligible Costs, C. Payment Request Process, and D. Invoicing, shall survive completion, suspension, termination, and expiration of this Agreement such that any Eligible Costs incurred during the Project Performance Period may be invoiced by Grantee and paid by Valley Water provided invoices, including final invoice, are submitted prior to the expiration date of this Agreement as stated in Section 1. General Provisions, H. Agreement Term. B. Notices All notices and other communication required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be personally delivered or mailed, postage prepaid and return receipt requested, addressed to the respective Representatives stated in Appendix A, Grant and Project Information: C. Agreement Execution Unless otherwise prohibited by law or policy of either Party, the Parties agree that an electronic copy of a signed agreement, or an electronically signed agreement, has the same force and legal effect as an agreement executed with an original ink signature. The term “electronic copy of a signed agreement” refers to a transmission by facsimile, electronic mail, or other electronic means of a copy of an original signed agreement in a portable document format. The term “electronically signed agreement” means an agreement that is executed by applying an electronic signature using technology approved by Valley Water. 163 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 163 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 14 of 25 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, THE PARTIES HAVE SET FORTH BELOW THEIR CONSENT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT THROUGH THE SIGNATURES OF THEIR DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES. LEGAL NAME OF GRANTEE SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT (REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) 164 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 164 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 15 of 25 APPENDIX A Grant and Project Information SECTION 1. GRANT INFORMATION A. GRANTEE: Enter Legal Name of Grantee; will autofill throughout B. PROJECT NAME: Enter Project Name; will autofill throughout C. GRANT TYPE: Make a selection. D. GRANT PRIORITIES: Make a selection. E. AWARD DATE: Select a date. F. AGREEMENT EFFECTIVE DATE: Make a selection. G. AGREEMENT EXPIRATION DATE: years from Agreement Effective Date H. ENTITY TYPE: Make a selection. I. GRANT AMOUNT: $0.00 J. REPRESENTATIVES: Valley Water: Rachael Gibson Chief of External Affairs Santa Clara Valley Water District 5750 Almaden Expressway San Jose, CA 95118-3686 Email: rgibson@valleywater.org 165 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 165 of 2882 APPENDIX A Grant and Project Information (continued) FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 16 of 25 Valley Water Primary Representative: Amy Fonseca Program Administrator Santa Clara Valley Water District 5750 Almaden Expressway San Jose, CA 95118 Phone: (408) 630-3005 Primary email: afonseca@valleywater.org Secondary email: grants@valleywater.org Grantee: First and Last Name Title Address City, State, Zip Code Phone: (XXX) XXX-XXXX Email: Email Address Grantee Primary Representative: Primary Representative or Authorized Signatory First and Last Name Title City, State, Zip Code Phone: (XXX) XXX-XXXX Email: Email Address (REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) 166 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 166 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 17 of 25 APPENDIX B Project Scope 167 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 167 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 18 of 25 APPENDIX C Project Schedule Any changes in this Project Schedule will be reported in the Grant Status Report using the template included as Appendix H, and are subject to approval by Valley Water. Changes in the Project Schedule are acceptable provided they do not extend performance of Grant-funded tasks beyond the expiration date of this Agreement. Estimated schedule is shown below. Task Start Date End Date (REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) 168 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 168 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 19 of 25 APPENDIX D Project Budget 169 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 169 of 2882 FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 20 of 25 APPENDIX E Resolution 170 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 170 of 2882 APPENDIX F Insurance Requirements (continued) FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 21 of 25 APPENDIX F Insurance Requirements Please Note: Failure to comply with the instructions below could result in a delay in executing the Agreement. Valley Water will not be responsible for time lost or costs incurred due to failure to comply with these requirements. Please note the checklist of documents needed at the end of this Appendix F Insurance Requirements. Without limiting the Grantee's indemnification of, or liability to, the Santa Clara Valley Water District (“Valley Water”), the Grantee must provide and maintain at its own expense, during the term of this Agreement, or as may be further required herein, the following insurance coverages and provisions as listed below. Grantee must provide its insurance broker(s)/agent(s) with a copy of these requirements and warrants that these requirements have been reviewed by Grantee’s insurance agent(s) and/or broker(s), who have been instructed by Grantee to procure the insurance coverage required herein. In addition to certificates, Grantee must furnish Valley Water with copies of all original endorsements affecting coverage required by this Appendix. The certificates and endorsements are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements and certificates are to be received and approved by Valley Water before the Agreement is effective. In the event of a claim or dispute, Valley Water has the right to require Grantee's insurer to provide complete, certified copies of all required pertinent insurance policies, including endorsements affecting the coverage required by this Appendix F Insurance Requirements. If your insurance broker has any questions about the above requirements, please advise him/her to call the Valley Water Risk Manager. CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE Grantee shall furnish Valley Water with a Certificate of Insurance. The certificates will be issued on a standard ACORD Form. Grantee shall instruct their insurance broker/agent to submit all insurance certificates and required notices electronically in PDF format to the designated Valley Water Program Administrator and email a copy to valleywater@ebix.com. The certificates will: 1. Identify the underwriters, the types of insurance, the insurance limits, the deductibles and the policy term; 2. Include copies of all the actual policy endorsements required herein; and 171 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 171 of 2882 APPENDIX F Insurance Requirements (continued) FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 22 of 25 3. In the “Certificate Holder” box include: Santa Clara Valley Water District Attention: Amy Fonseca 5750 Almaden Expressway San Jose, CA 95118 Agreement No. XXXXX IMPORTANT: The agreement number must be included. 4. In the Description of Operations/Locations/Vehicles/Special Items Box: a. Certificate Holder shall be named as Additional Insured; b. Valley Water agreement or project number shall appear; c. The list of policies scheduled as underlying on the Umbrella policy shall be listed; and d. Waiver of Subrogation must be indicated as endorsed to all policies. If Grantee receives any notice that any of the insurance policies required by this Appendix F Insurance Requirements may be cancelled or coverage reduced for any reason whatsoever, Grantee or insurer shall immediately provide written notice to the designated Valley Water Program Administrator that such insurance policy required by this Appendix F Insurance Requirements is canceled or coverage is reduced. MAINTENANCE OF INSURANCE If Grantee fails to maintain such insurance as is called for herein, Valley Water, at its option, may suspend payment for work performed and/or may order Grantee to suspend all Grantee’s work at Grantee’s expense until a new policy of insurance is in effect. RENEWAL OF INSURANCE Grantee will provide Valley Water with a current Certificate of Insurance and endorsements within Thirty (30) business days from the expiration of insurance. Grantee shall instruct its insurance broker/agent to: 1. Submit all renewals of insurance certificates and required notices electronically in PDF format to: RiskManager@valleywater.org; cc: grants@valleywater.org 2. Provide the following information in the “Certificate Holder” box: Santa Clara Valley Water District Attention: Amy Fonseca 5750 Almaden Expressway San Jose, CA 95118 Agreement No. IMPORTANT: The agreement number must be included. 172 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 172 of 2882 APPENDIX F Insurance Requirements (continued) FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 23 of 25 Grantee must, at its sole cost and expense, procure and maintain during the entire period of this Agreement the following insurance coverage(s). REQUIRED COVERAGES 1. Commercial General/Business Liability Insurance with coverage as indicated: $1,000,000 per occurrence/$1,000,000 aggregate limits for bodily injury and property damage. $1,000,000 Products/Completed Operations aggregate (to be maintained for at least three (3) years following acceptance of the work by Valley Water. General Liability insurance must: a. Be written on standard ISO forms and approved by Valley Water Risk Manager. b. Include coverage at least as broad as found in standard ISO form CG 0001. c. Include Premises and Operations. d. Include Contractual Liability expressly including liability assumed under this contract. e. If Grantee will be working within fifty (50) feet of a railroad or light rail operation, any exclusion as to performance of operations within the vicinity of any railroad bridge, trestle, track, roadbed, tunnel, overpass, underpass, or crossway must be deleted, or a railroad protective policy in the above amounts provided. f. Include Owners and Grantee’s Protective liability. g. Include Severability of Interest. h. Include Explosion, Collapse and Underground Hazards, (X, C, and U). i. Include Broad Form Property Damage liability. j. Contain no restrictive exclusions (such as but not limited to CG 2153, CG 2144 or CG 2294). Valley Water reserves the right to require certain restrictive exclusions be removed to ensure compliance with the above. 2. Business Auto Liability Insurance with coverage as indicated: $1,000,000 combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage per occurrence, covering all owned, non-owned and hired vehicles. Excess or Umbrella policies may be used to reach the above limits for the General Liability and/or Business Auto Liability insurance limits; however, all such policies must contain a primacy clause (See Section 2, General Conditions) and meet all other General Conditions below. 173 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 173 of 2882 APPENDIX F Insurance Requirements (continued) FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 24 of 25 3. Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance Statutory California Workers’ Compensation coverage covering all work to be performed for Valley Water. Employer Liability coverage for not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS With respect to all coverages noted above, the following additional requirements apply: 1. Additional Insured Endorsement(s): Grantee must provide an additional insured endorsement for Commercial General/Business Liability and Business Automobile liability coverage naming the Santa Clara Valley Water District, its Directors, officers, employees, and agents, individually and collectively, as additional insureds, and must provide coverage for acts, omissions, etc., arising out of the named insureds’ activities and work. NOTE: This section does not apply to the Workers’ Compensation. 2. Primacy Clause: Grantee will provide evidence (either through the Certificate of Insurance, endorsement or language in the insurance contract) that Grantee’s insurance is primary with respect to any other insurance which may be carried by Valley Water, its Directors, its officers, agents and employees, and Valley Water’s coverage must not be called upon to contribute or share in the loss. NOTE: This section does not apply to the Workers’ Compensation policies. 3. Cancellation Clause: Grantee will provide endorsements for all policies stating that the policy will not be cancelled without 30 days prior notification to Valley Water. 4. Acceptability of Insurers: All coverages must be issued by companies admitted to conduct business in the State of California, which hold a current policy holder’s alphabetic and financial size category rating of not less than A-V, according to the current Best's Key Rating Guide or a company of equal financial stability that is approved by Valley Water’s Risk Manager. Non-Admitted companies may be substituted on a very limited basis at the Risk Manager’s sole discretion. 5. Self-Insured Retentions or Deductibles: Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by Valley Water. At the option of Valley Water, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects Valley Water, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Grantee shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the Entity guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses. Grantee agrees that in the event of a claim they will pay down any agreed upon SIR in a prompt manner as soon as bills are incurred in order to trigger the insurance related to the SIR. 6. Subcontractors: The Grantee shall secure and maintain or shall be responsible for ensuring that all subcontractors performing the Contract Services secure and maintain all insurance coverages appropriate to their tier and scope of work in a form and from insurance companies reasonably acceptable to Valley Water. 7. Amount of Liability Not Limited to Amount of Insurance: The insurance procured by Grantee for the benefit of Valley Water must not be deemed to release or limit any 174 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 174 of 2882 APPENDIX F Insurance Requirements (continued) FY [YYYY] Safe, Clean Water Project F9 Standard Grant Program Valley Water/[Grantee – Project Name] Version MM/DD/YY Page 25 of 25 liability of Grantee. Damages recoverable by Valley Water for any liability of Grantee must, in any event, not be limited by the amount of the required insurance coverage. 8. Coverage to Be Occurrence Based: Except for Professional Liability, all coverage must be occurrence-based coverage. Claims-made coverage is not allowed. 9. Waiver of Subrogation: Grantee agrees to waive subrogation against Valley Water to the extent any loss suffered by Grantee is covered by any Commercial General Liability policy, Automobile policy, Workers’ Compensation policy described in Required Coverages above. Grantee agrees to advise its broker/agent/insurer and agrees to provide evidence (either through the Certificate of Insurance, endorsement or language in the insurance contract) that subrogation has been waived by its insurer. 10. Non-compliance: Valley Water reserves the right to withhold payments to the Grantee in the event of material noncompliance with the insurance requirements outlined above. CHECKLIST OF DOCUMENTS NEEDED General Liability: A. Limits ($1,000,000) B. Additional Insured (Endorsement) Auto Liability: A. Limits ($1,000,000) B. Additional Insured (Endorsement) Umbrella Workers’ Comp ($1,000,000) Appendix F, StandardGrantsGL_rev. 09.24.25. (REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK) 175 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 175 of 2882 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item Subject:Approve a budget modification in the amount of $475,000 for ballot measure preparation services and County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voter election services fees. 1. Approve a Budget Adjustment in the amount of $475,000 in the General Fund for ballot support services with TeamCivX and election services fees from the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters (GL# 100-41-405 700-702) 2. Adopt Resolution No. 26-036 approving budget modification #2526-437, approving a additional General Fund appropriation in the amount of $475,000 for ballot support services with TeamCivX and election services fees from the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters (GL# 100-41-405 700- 702). CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 4/3/2026Page 1 of 1 176 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 176 of 2882 1 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3220 CUPERTINO.GOV CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Date: April 7, 2026 Subject Approve a budget modification in the amount of $475,000 for ballot measure preparation services and County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voter election services fees. Recommended Action 1. Approve a Budget Adjustment in the amount of $475,000 in the General Fund for ballot support services with TeamCivX and election services fees from the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters (GL# 100-41-405 700-702) 2. Adopt Resolution No. 26-xxx approving budget modification #2526-437, approving a additional General Fund appropriation in the amount of $475,000 for ballot support services with TeamCivX and election services fees from the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters (GL# 100-41-405 700-702). Background The City is currently forecasting a revenue shortfall in future fiscal years due to increases in the County of Santa Clara Sheriff contract for public safety services. In response, on February 19 staff presented to City Council potential revenue generating measures for consideration. Council directed staff to further analyze business tax, the Utility User Tax (UUT), and sales tax options in addition to other measures to create cost effectiveness while retaining business competitiveness. On March 3, Council directed staff to return with a plan for a proposed parkland ballot measure that would provide further protections for recreational facilities and parkland sites. On March 17, Council considered additional analysis on business tax, UUT, and sales tax options and directed staff to contract for ballot measure support services that will evaluate expanding and/or extending the UUT that expires during fiscal year 2030-31 and pursuing a parkland rezoning protection effort. In March 2026, staff conducted a competitive procurement process and selected TeamCivX to provide feasibility assessment, awareness building, and ballot measure development services for each of these potential ballot measures. A contract with TeamCivX is currently in development and will be awarded under the City Manager’s authority with City Council budget approval. The County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters administers the election on behalf of the City and charges fees for election services, including labor, materials, and administrative support necessary to conduct the election. 177 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 177 of 2882 2 Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options To adequately prepare for placing any ballot measure on the November 3, 2026, general election, it is important to begin feasibility assessment services with TeamCivX in April 2026. These efforts will include a thorough assessment of the local landscape, recent election results and additional research to design an opinion survey of local voters. This survey will consider extending the current UUT and possible slight increase in the tax rate while also soliciting feedback on a parkland rezoning measure. The opinion survey will be reviewed and approved by staff before it is conducted with a representative sample of likely voters in Cupertino. The results of the feasibility assessment will generate recommendations for how to structure the ballot measure(s), necessary communication to support the measure and, if the ballot measure(s) do not appear viable, recommended alternative strategies for pursuit. These recommendations will be provided to Council for consideration on which measure(s) to pursue. If Council determines to not proceed with either measure, staff will terminate the remaining contract tasks with TeamCivX and conclude this effort. If Council determines a ballot measure should be pursued, staff will engage TeamCivX to provide awareness to Cupertino residents and businesses of the proposed measure(s) and offer opportunities for community input. All communications will be reviewed by staff and the City Attorney’s Office to ensure it complies with state law. After collecting input through the outreach measures, TeamCivX will work closely with the City in developing the ballot measure language for the City Attorney’s review before providing to the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters. Staff will provide updates to Council as the City proceeds with informational communication to Cupertino residents and businesses, and through development of the ballot measure. Based on the information presented, staff recommends approving the budget adjustment so feasibility assessment efforts can begin for potential ballot measures related to UUT and parkland rezoning. Sustainability Impact No sustainability impact. Fiscal Impact An additional General Fund appropriation of $475,000 is requested to support ballot measure preparation services and fees for election services provided by the County of Santa Clara Registrar of Voters. A corresponding increase in appropriations to the applicable budget (100-41- 405 700-702) is required, as no funding is currently allocated for these services. The estimated cost to complete the initial feasibility assessment phase, including survey design, polling, and analysis of voter sentiment, is approximately $74,000, with total costs dependent on the scope of services, including outreach and ballot measure development. If Council elects not to proceed with one or both ballot measures following the feasibility assessment, any remaining appropriated funds will be returned to the General Fund. City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description None 178 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 178 of 2882 3 Council Goal: N/A. California Environmental Quality Act No California Environmental Quality Act impact. _____________________________________ Prepared by: Greg Card, Purchasing Manager Reviewed by: Jonathan Orozco, Acting Director of Administrative Services Floy Andrews, Interim City Attorney Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager Attachments: A – Draft Budget Resolution 179 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 179 of 2882 Attachment A RESOLUTION NO. 26-XXX A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL AMENDING THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025-26 BY APPROPRIATING, TRANSFERRING, AND UNAPPROPRIATING MONIES FOR SPECIFIED FUNDS WHEREAS, the orderly administration of municipal government depends on a sound fiscal policy of maintaining a proper ratio of expenditures within anticipated revenues and available monies; and WHEREAS, accomplishing City Council directives, projects and programs, and performing staff duties and responsibilities likewise depends on the monies available for that purpose; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has determined that the balances from the funds specified in this resolution are adequate to cover the proposed amended appropriations, and therefore recommends the fund reallocations described herein. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the recommended fund reallocations and ratifies the attached amended appropriations as set forth in Exhibit A. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of April 2026, by the following vote: Vote Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 180 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 180 of 2882 Attachment A SIGNED: ________ Kitty Moore, Mayor ________________________ Date ________________________ Lauren Sapudar, City Clerk ________________________ Date 181 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 181 of 2882 Attachment A Exhibit A Appropriation Amendment by Fund Appropriation Amendment Revenue Amendment Fund Balance (Use of) General Fund (100) Total Appropriation Amendment All Funds $475,000 $- $(475,000) 182 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 182 of 2882 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item Subject: Authorization for Mayor to Sign Multi-Jurisdictional Letter Regarding State Housing Legislation. Authorize the Mayor to sign a joint letter with West Valley Mayors requesting the State Legislature to consider a temporary pause on new housing legislation to allow for evaluation and implementation of existing laws. CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 4/3/2026Page 1 of 1 183 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 183 of 2882 CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3212 CUPERTINO.GOV CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Date: April 7, 2026 Subject Authorization for Mayor to Sign Multi-Jurisdictional Letter Regarding State Housing Legislation Recommended Action Authorize the Mayor to sign a joint letter with West Valley Mayors requesting the State Legislature to consider a temporary pause on new housing legislation to allow for evaluation and implementation of existing laws. Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options Mayor Mark Turner from the City of Morgan Hill has prepared a letter addressed to the Speaker of the California State Assembly requesting a temporary pause on the adoption of new housing legislation and has requested other neighboring cities to consider signing the letter as well. The letter cites the significant volume of housing-related laws enacted in recent years and the resulting challenges local jurisdictions face in implementation, administration, and compliance. The letter emphasizes that while cities remain committed to addressing the State’s housing goals, the pace of legislative changes has created operational and resource constraints. It requests a two-year pause to allow for evaluation of recently adopted laws, identification of potential conflicts or redundancies, and assessment of outcomes and impacts. Mayor Turner is requesting the Mayors from all cities within Santa Clara County to sign the letter to create a joint letter from all neighboring jurisdictions to express shared concerns regarding the implementation of state housing mandates. If approved, the draft letter (Attachment A) will be updated to list the City of Cupertino as an additional signer with the City logo added to the letter. Sustainability Impact No sustainability impact. 184 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 184 of 2882 Fiscal Impact No fiscal impact. City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description None Council Goal Public Engagement and Transparency California Environmental Quality Act No California Environmental Quality Act impact. _____________________________________ Prepared by: Astrid Robles, Senior Management Analyst Reviewed by: Kirsten Squarcia, Deputy City Manager Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager Attachments: A – Letter from Mayor Turner to Speaker Rivas 185 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 185 of 2882 March 12, 2026 Dear Speaker Rivas, Thank you for the opportunity to attend your Legislative Day on February 25. I greatly appreciated the invitation and the chance to hear directly about your priorities as well as from other legislators. The dialogue and engagement were both informative and encouraging. I am writing to respectfully request your leadership in considering a temporary pause on the passage of new housing legislation while the Legislature undertakes a comprehensive review of the significant body of housing laws enacted in recent years. Your suggestion to examine what is working and what is not within our existing statutory framework is both timely and prudent. Over the past several years, nearly 150 housing-related bills have been signed into law, with approximately 50 new housing measures enacted in 2025 alone. Many of the 2025 measures went into effect with the Governor’s approval of the budget. This extraordinary pace reflects the Legislature’s strong commitment to addressing California’s housing challenges. However, the volume and speed of these changes have created substantial implementation pressures for local governments charged with carrying them out. City governments across the state are increasingly overwhelmed by the continuous stream of new housing legislation introduced and enacted each legislative cycle. Planning departments, housing divisions, and legal teams are working diligently to interpret, integrate, and operationalize new requirements, often while prior mandates are still in early stages of implementation. The result is a growing strain on administrative capacity, limited opportunity to evaluate outcomes, and difficulty ensuring consistent and effective application of state policy. Our state and regional agencies are attempting to provide technical assistance related to implementation but that is also delayed with the quantity of new mandates. Guidance on implementation often comes six months to a year after the mandate is in effect. A deliberate pause would not signal retreat from the state’s housing goals. Rather, it would demonstrate a commitment to thoughtful governance and evidence -based policymaking. Taking the next two years to refrain from enacting additional housing statutes would provide the Legislature, in partnership with local governments and stakeholders, with the opportunity to: • Review housing laws passed within the last four years • Evaluate measurable outcomes and unintended consequences • Identify redundancies, conflicts, or areas requiring clarification • Assess administrative and fiscal impacts on local jurisdictions • Strengthen and refine existing statutes where necessary 186 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 186 of 2882 Such a review would help ensure that California’s housing framework is coherent, effective, and sustainable. It would also allow local municipalities to focus on full and faithful implementation of existing mandates rather than continuously adjusting to new ones. Your leadership in advancing a structured review process could foster collaboration between the State and local governments, strengthen public confidence, and ultimately produce more durable and impactful housing policy. Thank you for your continued commitment to addressing California’s housing needs and for considering this request. I appreciate your thoughtful attention to this matter and your ongoing service to the people of California. Sincerely, Mark Turner Mayor 187 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 187 of 2882 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item Subject: Consider a Use Permit, Tentative Map, Architectural and Site Approval, and Tree Removal Permit for the construction of a 122-unit residential development, consisting of 66 small-lot single family homes and 56 townhomes located at the Stevens Creek Office Center site, which includes a multi-tenant retail building (Voyager Coffee and Panera Bread). The project utilizes Senate Bill 330 and provisions of State Density Bonus law. (Application No(s): U-2024-008, TM-2024-006, ASA-2024- 011, TR-2024-033; Applicant: Kevin Choy, Harvest Properties; Location: 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd; APNs: 326-32-050, -051, -052, and -053.) 1. Find the project statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 2. Approve the following permits: a. Adopt Resolution No. 26-037 approving Use Permit (U-2024-008) (Attachment A); and b. Adopt Resolution No. 26-038 approving Architectural & Site Approval Permit (ASA-2024-011) (Attachment B); and c. Adopt Resolution No. 26-039 approving Tentative Map (TM-2026-006) (Attachment C); and d. Adopt Resolution No. 26-040 approving Tree Removal permit (TR-2024-033) (Attachment D). CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 4/3/2026Page 1 of 1 188 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 188 of 2882 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3308 CUPERTINO.GOV CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Date: April 7, 2026 Subject Consider a Use Permit, Tentative Map, Architectural and Site Approval, and Tree Removal Permit for the construction of a 122-unit residential development, consisting of 66 small-lot single family homes and 56 townhomes located at the Stevens Creek Office Center site, which includes a multi-tenant retail building (Voyager Coffee and Panera Bread). The project utilizes Senate Bill 330 and provisions of State Density Bonus law. (Application No(s): U-2024-008, TM-2024-006, ASA-2024-011, TR-2024-033; Applicant: Kevin Choy, Harvest Properties; Location: 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd; APNs: 326-32-050, -051, -052, and -053.) Recommended Action 1. Find the project statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and 2. Approve the following permits: a. Adopt Resolution No. 26-XXX approving Use Permit (U-2024-008) (Attachment A); b. Adopt Resolution No. 26-XXX approving Architectural & Site Approval Permit (ASA- 2024-011) (Attachment B); c. Adopt Resolution No. 26-XXX approving Tentative Map (TM-2026-006) (Attachment C); d. Adopt Resolution No. 26-XXX approving Tree Removal permit (TR-2024-033) (Attachment D). Executive Summary This report outlines a project proposed by Harvest Properties for a 122-unit housing development, including 66 single-family homes and 56 townhomes, across four existing parcels. The report covers the applicable State laws, including the Housing Accountability Act, Housing Crisis Act, No Net Loss law, and Density Bonus law, and local standards applicable to the project. The report also includes a summary of the Planning Commission hearing on March 24, 2026, including public comment, Planning Commission discussion, and additional information on city- lead outreach efforts to on-site retail tenants. Finally, the report summarizes the findings necessary for the Council to take action on the project. 189 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 189 of 2882 2 Discussion Project Data General Plan Land Use Designation Commercial / Office / Residential with a maximum residential density of 25 du/acre* Special Planning Area Heart of the City Specific Plan (Crossroads subarea) Zoning Designation P(CG, Res)* Lot Area 6.93 acres (gross), 6.84 acres (net) Allowed/Required Proposed Maximum Density Up to 25 units per acre* 17.84 units per acre Height of Structures Max. 45 feet measured from sidewalk to top of cornice, parapet, or eave line of a peaked (Waiver) Setbacks Front 35 feet from edge of curb 32 feet from edge of curb (Waiver) Sides One-half height of buildings or 10’, whichever is greater (16’ to 25’-3”) Townhomes: 6’ to 10’ Detached SFDs: 8’ to 9.5’ (Waiver) Rear One & one-half height of building, with a minimum of 20’ (64’) 10’ 1” (Waiver) Usable Open Space Common 150 square feet per unit of multi- unit buildings (8,400 square feet) 183 square feet (average per attached unit) Private 60 square feet per unit and no dimension less than 6 feet Between 61 square feet – 642 square feet per unit. Project Consistency with: General Plan1 2 waivers requested for setbacks, building height, and Heart of the City 1 The applicable General Plan can be found online at https://records.cupertino.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=1019620&dbid=0&repo=CityofCupertino&_gl=1*g ufghv*_ga*OTc5OTgwMjc4LjE3NDQ3Mzc0NDM.*_ga_NCY1KGMD5Y*czE3NDkwMDIwNzAkbzY2JGcxJ HQxNzQ5MDAyMDgwJGo1MCRsMCRoMA. 2 The applicable version of the Heart of the City Specific Plan can be found online at https://www.cupertino.gov/files/assets/city/v/1/departments/documents/communitydevelopment/planning /and-use-plans/heart-of-the-city-specific.pdf. 190 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 190 of 2882 3 waivers requested for lot coverage, number of stories, setbacks, * Since the project utilizes the provisions of SB 330 (as discussed later in the report) the development standards, regulations & fees applicable at the time of submitting a SB apply. One of the sites (APN: 326-32-050) is a Housing Element site (Priority Housing Site no. 9) in the 6th Cycle Housing Element, with a General Plan land use designation of High/ Very High Density Residential, with a minimum density of 50 du/ac and a maximum density of 65 du/ac, and has a zoning designation of R-4. However, the applicant vested the project prior to the adoption of the current Housing Element & under SB 330, the applicable General Plan land use designation is Commercial/Office/Residential with a maximum residential density of 25 du/ac zoning designation of P(CG/Res) – Planned Development Zoning District intended to be developed Background On April 1, 2024, the City received an SB 330 pre-application to redevelop the property located at 20807, 20813, 20823 and 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd. The project site is located within the Crossroads subarea of the Heart of the City (“HOC”) Specific Plan Area. The applicant subsequently submitted a formal project application for the proposal on September 25, 2024, within 180 days of the submission of the SB 330 pre-application, which granted it certain vesting privileges under State law. The 6.84 net-acre property is comprised of four parcels bound by Stevens Creek Boulevard to the south and Alves Drive to the north. The site is currently developed with 1- and 2- story office buildings and a retail commercial building with surface parking. The project site shares a property line with Abundant Life Assembly of God Church, Whole Foods Market, and a single-family home to the west; and a commercial strip mall (Saich Way Station) and Happy Child Development Center to the east. Other surrounding uses include single-family homes, duplexes, and the YMCA located across Alves Drive to the north, and the recently approved SummerHill townhome development (currently occupied by Staples, and the former Fontana’s and Pizza Hut buildings) 191 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 191 of 2882 4 across Stevens Creek Boulevard to the south. The Target Bottegas Center is located directly across from Saich Way, to the east of the project site (See Figure 1). Existing uses at the site consist of roughly 109,000 square-feet of office space and 7,000 square- feet of retail space. Approximately 107,000 square feet of office space is currently occupied by several office tenants; all retail square footage is occupied by two tenants, Panera Bread and Voyager Coffee. The south-west corner of the site (APN 326-32-050), outlined in black in Figure 1, was designated as a Priority Housing Site through the adoption of the City’s 2024 Housing Element update in May 20243 and rezoned two months later, in July, to accommodate high-density residential development. The current land use designation for APN 326-32-050 would require a minimum density of 50.01 units per acre and a maximum of 65 units per acre. However, when the SB 330 preliminary application was submitted in April 2024, the City’s Housing Element had not yet been officially certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). This allowed the applicant to “lock in” the development standards that were in place at the time of their preliminary application submittal. Therefore, the project site is subject to the development standards of the General Plan, Heart of the City Specific Plan, and Planned Development “P” zoning designation, as they were in April of 2024. In April 2024, the parcels had a land use designation of Commercial/Office/Residential which allowed residential development of up to 25 units per acre and a zoning designation of P(CG,Res). The “P” zoning designation is detailed in Cupertino Municipal Code, Chapter 19.80, Planned Development Zones. The “P” zoning designation is intended to provide a means of guiding land development or redevelopment within the city that is uniquely suited for planned coordination of land uses and land development. Where residential development is proposed on properties in the Planned Development zoning district, and where the Specific Plan is silent, development must adhere to Multifamily (R-3) zoning regulations. Principally, the proposed project consists of 56 townhome-style condominiums and 66 detached single-family dwellings. Since the project is 100% residential, review of the project is limited by several applicable State laws, including the Housing Accountability Act, the Housing Crisis Act (SB 330), and Density Bonus Law (Attachment E). While the first two State laws apply because the project meets the definition of a “housing development project,” State density bonus law applies because the project proposes to provide qualifying amounts of affordable housing. Twenty percent, or 24 4 of the proposed 122 residential units, will be affordable to moderate- and median-income households, consistent with the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) requirements, making the project eligible for all applicable benefits of State density bonus law. It is important to note that, while qualifying projects are allowed to increase their density and the total number of units proposed, an applicant may also elect to only utilize the available waivers, concessions, or the reduced parking standards, without providing additional density bonus units, as is the case with the proposed project. The project includes a 3 The City’s Housing Element is available online at: Cupertino.gov/gp. 4 The Project is required to provide 24.4 units (20% of 122 units). Pursuant to the City’s BMR program, 24 units will be provided on site, and 0.4 units will be paid in in-lieu fee. 192 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 192 of 2882 5 request for 12 waivers and one concession from applicable standards of the General Plan, HOC, BMR Manual and Zoning Code. These requests are discussed later in this report. Project Proposal The project applicant, Harvest Properties, is proposing a 122-unit residential development, consisting of a mixture of detached single-family residences and townhome-condominiums. The project consists of seven 8-plex townhome buildings, all located on the south side of the site closer to Stevens Creek Boulevard, and 66 detached single-family residences, located along Alves Drive and the remainder of the site (see Attachment 7: Site Plan and Renderings). The project is comprised entirely of three-story buildings with 33 of the 122 units having fourth-floor access to proposed roof top decks. The 56 townhome units range in size (including garage space) from 2,273 square feet to 3,304 square feet; and the 66 detached single-family residences (including garage space) will be either 2,973 square feet or 3,541 square feet. As required by the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Program, 24 of the proposed units will be affordable housing units for sale to median- and moderate-income households 5 (see Figure 2). The applicant proposes that all BMR units will be located in the townhomes; no single-family homes are being offered as BMR units. Based on the scope of project, the City has required the following entitlements: Use Permit, Architectural and Site Approval, Tree Removal Permit, and a Vesting Tentative Map. Architecture and Site Design The project places denser townhome development closer to Steven’s Creek Boulevard in an attempt to blend in with the urban, commercial character of the Crossroads subarea. A variety of materials and colors are proposed to accentuate changes in building plane, which is intended to add visual interest to the architecture without having to rely on faux ornamentation. Roof decks are provided throughout the site for a total of 33 townhomes and single-family residences. All new residences will provide one private balcony on the second floor; additionally, each detached single-family residence will include private side yards at each unit. An approximately 32--foot- wide “central green” is provided as a buffer between the single-family neighborhood and the slightly denser townhome portion of the development. 5 Due to limitations of Government Code § 65103.5, the distribution of copyrighted material associated with the review of development projects is limited. Plans have been emailed under separate cover to allow the Commissioners to review the proposed plans. Commissioners and Councilmembers cannot share plans with outside parties, including community members. The public is able to make an appointment with the Planning Division to view these plans at City Hall. 193 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 193 of 2882 6 The applicant has proposed a combination of three different architectural styles that alternate throughout the site: 1) Spanish Revival, 2) Modern French and 3) Craftsman. The Spanish style features lower-pitched roofs with gable ends, traditional stucco finishes, and arched or corbeled entries. The Modern French style includes shallow-pitched main roofs with steeper gable ends, simple bay window details, and fiber cement panel accents. The Craftsman style, applied only to the single-family detached homes, features a 6:12 roof pitch, gable ends with shingle-style siding, deep eaves with detailed trim, as well as bracket and corbel details. The majority of the trees proposed for the interior of the site are also deciduous, providing flowers and/or foliage color. The primary water classification for new trees and landscape on site fall within low to moderate water usage. Shrubs will be utilized to screen all above ground utilities, as permitted by PG&E regulations. Private seven-foot-wide side yards are provided for all 66 detached single-family residences. A six-foot-tall’ “good neighbor” wood fence will be used to create private backyards between each detached unit. Pedestrian walkways will be large, tile-stamped concrete, with color accents incorporated in walkways in common areas. Common areas will be planted with shade trees and provide a mix of benches, seat walls, tables, and chairs for residents. Public art will be centered in the main common area with accessible pedestrian walkways (with a proposed public access easement) provided from both Stevens Creek Blvd. and Alves Drive. Crosswalks throughout the site will be delineated with an Ashlar pattern stamped asphalt in earthtone shades. The applicant will continue the decorative brick paving within the public right-of-way along Stevens Creek Blvd, adjacent to the accessible path of travel. This will connect the existing decorative paving pattern from 20807 Steven’s Creek Blvd to 20955 Steven Creek Blvd. This improvement will complete the decorative brick pavers along the entire frontage of the project site. The project falls within the Crossroads subarea: Flowering Orchard Guidelines as identified in the Heart of the City Specific Plan. Accordingly, the existing Flowering Pear trees along the frontage of Steven’s Creek Blvd are proposed to remain and be protected in place; in addition, four new Flowering Pear trees are proposed to fill in the west parkway along Steven’s Creek Blvd as required by the Heart of the City Specific Plan. Analysis General Plan Compliance The proposed project consists of a residential development consistent with the site’s General Plan Land Use Designation of Commercial/Office/Residential. The General Plan designation allows a maximum density of 25 dwelling units per acre, which equates to 173 units for the 6.93-acre site. The General Plan does not require a minimum density. The 122 units proposed is well below the maximum allowed by the General Plan and is consistent with the density in effect when the SB 330 Preliminary Application was submitted. Staff has evaluated the project’s consistency with the General Plan and concludes that based on the conformance with the General Plan Land Use designation for the site, the general alignment of design with applicable General Plan requirements, notwithstanding the limitations of State law, and the absence of environmental impacts analyzed in the Notice of Exemption memo (see 194 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 194 of 2882 7 Environmental Review section of this Staff Report), the proposed project supports several of the City’s General Plan goals, as outlined below. Policy LU-2.2: Pedestrian-Oriented Public Spaces. Require developments to incorporate pedestrian-scaled elements along the street and within the development such as parks, plazas, active uses along the street, active uses, entries, outdoor dining & public art. • Policy LU-3.3: Building Design. Ensure that building layouts and design are compatible with the surrounding environment and enhance the streetscape and pedestrian activity. • Strategy LU-3.3.10: Entrances. In multi-family projects where residential uses may front on streets, require pedestrian-scaled elements such as entries, stoops, and porches along the street. • Policy LU-27.2: Relationship to the Street. Ensure that new development in and adjacent to neighborhoods improve the walkability of neighborhoods by providing inviting entries, stoops and porches along the street frontage, compatible building design and reducing visual impacts of garages. • Policy INF 2.4.2 Development. Require undergrounding of all utility lines in new developments and highly encourage undergrounding in remodels or redevelopment of major projects. • Strategy HE-2.3.7: Density Bonus Ordinance. The City will encourage use of density bonuses and incentives, as applicable, for housing developments which include: o At least 10 percent of the housing units in a for-sale common interest development are restricted to moderate-income residents. Specific Plan Compliance The project site is in the Heart of the City Special Area – Crossroads Subarea. The City’s HOC Specific Plan establishes building heights, setbacks, and other development requirements for projects within this area. The proposal includes several density bonus waivers for setbacks, building height, lot coverage, and reduced parking garage dimension requirements from the Municipal Code and HOC standards, which are discussed in further detail in the density bonus section of the staff report. The project has incorporated some site design requirements, which are consistent with the remaining applicable requirements of the HOC Specific Plan. Tree Removal and Replacement The project site contains 251 on-site trees and 18 off-site trees. Six of the off-site trees are street trees within the public right-of-way, and the remaining 12 off-site trees are on private property along the western property line. The proposal includes the removal of 249 protected development trees within the construction footprint. Two native coast live oaks are located off-site (on the Abundant Life Church property to the west) and will be protected in place. An arborist report was prepared for the applicant by Michelia Arboriculture, LLC and was peer reviewed by the City’s third-party consultant, HortScience | Bartlett (Attachment F). The report and peer review concluded that 249 of the trees proposed for removal would be within the construction footprint and could not be preserved or otherwise adequately protected during construction. All 18 off-site trees are proposed to remain and will be protected in place. This is inclusive of the existing six 195 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 195 of 2882 8 Callery Pear street trees along Steven’s Creek Blvd., the species is consistent with the requirements of the Heart of the City Specific Plan “flowering orchard” planting theme. The City’s requirements for tree replacement, consistent with Cupertino Municipal Code Section 14.18.160 (A), are as follows: Diameter of Trunk of Removed Tree # of Trees Proposed for Removal Replacement Tree Size Required Replacement Trees Required inches and up One 36" box tree or inches and up One 36" box tree or Total: 249 (24” box trees) or 63 (24” and 36” box tree mix) The applicant proposes to replace 249 trees with 151 on-site trees of various species. Replacement trees will be either 24 or 36-inch box in size, consistent with Municipal Code tree replacement requirements. Since the applicant proposes to pay an in-lieu of planting a replacement tree fee for the remainder of the trees due to the lack of available replanting space on-site, the valuation of the trees not being replaced upon removal has been calculated based on the standards outlined in CMC 14.18.160 Tree Replacement. The in-lieu of replacement fee has been calculated to be approximately $147,422.00, which will be paid prior to issuance of site improvement/grading permits. It is noted that if the landscape plan needs to be revised due to code compliance requirements, the replacement plantings and in-lieu fee payment may be adjusted prior to issuance of building permits. This is reflected in the conditions of approval included with the Tree Removal Permit resolution. All new development trees and landscaping planted on-site will be considered protected, and a condition of approval has been included to require that an agreement be executed to ensure the ongoing preservation, maintenance, and protection of the new trees and landscaping by future property owners. Vesting Tentative Map The application for the Vesting Tentative Map (VTM) proposes to subdivide the four existing lots to create a condominium subdivision. The map proposes to establish 66 single-family lots and 56 condominium (air-space) parcels for the proposed townhome units with additional roadway and open space parcels to support the development. The approval of a vesting tentative map confers a vested right to proceed with development in substantial compliance with the city's ordinances, policies, and standards in effect at the date the City determined the application was complete. 196 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 196 of 2882 9 Use Permit The project proposal requires a Use Permit to allow the development of residential units on a non-Housing Element site6. Under the regulations in effect at the time of submittal of the SB 330 Preliminary Application, the General Plan and Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 19.80: Planned Development (P) Zones required that a residential development proposed on a site that is not a Priority Housing Site be a conditional use. The applicant proposes building exclusively residential units and the project is, therefore, required to obtain Conditional Use Permit approval as part of its entitlement process. Park Land Dedication Under Cupertino Municipal Code Section 13.08.050(A), proposed developments of more than 50 units must provide park land on-site and/or pay an in-lieu fee for the required park land dedication. The project would be required to provide approximately 0.58 acres of park area or an in-lieu of dedication fee, based on Municipal Code Chapter 13.08 requirements. The applicant has requested to pay an in-lieu fee instead of providing parkland. Based on the property size, project size, the provision of common open space, and the location of the property within a quarter mile of existing park facilities 7, staff recommends the payment of an in-lieu fee rather than requiring the dedication of onsite park land. Thus, the project is conditioned to pay a parkland in-lieu fee. Since the project includes 24 deed-restricted affordable units, consistent with the City’s Housing Element policies and the BMR Mitigation Manual, these affordable units are exempt from paying parkland dedication fees. Therefore, the project would pay $5,880,000 for the 98 proposed market rate units 8. Density Bonus The project includes 24 below-market rate (BMR) units, or 20% of the total number of units proposed. As required by the City’s BMR Housing Program, 12 of the units will be allocated as affordable housing units for-sale to median-income households (80-100% of Area Median Income) and the other 12 units will be allocated as affordable for sale to moderate-income households (100-120% of Area Median Income). A condition of approval has been included to ensure the recordation of a regulatory agreement with the City, prior to occupancy, requiring the designated BMR units to be for-sale to households at the specified income levels for a 99-year term. Density Bonus and Waiver Requests The project is eligible for Density Bonus waivers and concessions consistent with the City of Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter (CMC) 19.56 Density Bonus and State Density Bonus Law. The project includes requests for 12 waivers. 6 While this is not a current requirement, since this was a requirement at the time of submittal of the applicant’s SB 330 Preliminary Application, a Use Permit is required. None of the sites were identified as a Priority Housing Element in the 5th Cycle Housing Element. 7 Memorial Park is located 0.28 miles to the west and Faria Elementary School Field is located 0.22 miles southwest of the project site. 8 Due to the SB 330 nature of the project, the Park Fees payable are those in effect as of April 2024. 197 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 197 of 2882 10 Section 19.56.070 of the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance (“Findings") requires that, before approving an application which includes a request for a density bonus, waivers, or reduction in parking standards, the decision-making body must determine that the proposal is consistent with State Density Bonus Law by making the following findings9, as applicable: 1. That the housing development is eligible for the density bonus being requested as well as any incentives or concessions, waivers or reductions in parking standards that are requested. 2. That the development standard(s) for which the waiver(s) are requested would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of the housing development with the density bonus and incentives or concessions permitted if a waiver was not requested. The City may not deny a waiver of a development standard that would physically preclude the construction of the project as it is designed, unless it is found that the waiver or reduction would have a specific, adverse impact upon health or safety, for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact, or would have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources. Parking While the City’s Municipal Code (Chapter 19.124) requires townhome projects to provide 2.8 parking spaces per dwelling unit10, State Density Bonus Law provides its own parking ratios for qualifying projects. Specifically, the Density Bonus Law allows qualifying projects to provide parking at a ratio of 1 parking space per studio to one-bedroom unit; 1.5 parking spaces per two- or three-bedroom unit; and 2.5 parking spaces per four- or more-bedroom unit. No additional guest spaces are required under Density Bonus law provisions. Unit Type Number of Units Municipal Code State Density Bonus Law Provided 122 342 263 272 As proposed by the applicant, each unit will include two enclosed garage spaces (244 total spaces), with 28 additional spaces for guests, for a total of 272 spaces onsite, when only 263 are required per state density bonus law. 9 Government Code Section 65915 (d)(4): The city, county, or city and county shall bear the burden of proof for the denial of a requested concession or incentive. 10 While under updated Municipal Code amendments adopted in conjunction with Housing Element updates, townhomes are required to provide only one parking space per unit, since the project is vested under SB 330 to standards in effect at the time the SB 330 preliminary application was submitted, the project much provide 2.8 parking spaces (2 enclosed and 0.8 guest). 198 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 198 of 2882 11 Waivers Requested As a density bonus project, the applicant may submit proposals for an unlimited number of waivers, or reduction of development standards, that would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of the project as proposed/designed (Government Code Section 65915(e)). As previously noted, a city may not deny a proposed project based on the theory that another project, with a similar number of units, might be designed differently and accommodated without waivers of development standards. The project requires 12 waivers as follows: 1. 45-Foot Height Limitation (HOC Specific Plan Section 1.01.030) The HOC Specific Plan requires that developments have a maximum height of 45 feet, as measured from the sidewalk to the top of a building’s cornice, parapet, or eave line of a peaked roof. The applicant has requested a waiver for a total of 30 buildings to increase the height allowed for 26 detached single-family dwellings (SFD) and four townhouse buildings as follows: Single Family Building No. Building Height (feet)Building No. Building Height (feet) Townhome Building No. Building Height (feet)Building No. Building Height (feet) 199 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 199 of 2882 12 The other 40 detached SFDs buildings and three townhome buildings meet the height requirement of the HOC Specific Plan as proposed. The applicant states that imposing the 45- foot height restriction on the buildings for which waivers have been requested would result in changing the height and design of the buildings, including the potential removal of private open space in the form of rooftop decks, which is not consistent with the project as proposed. 2. Front Setback (HOC Specific Plan Section 1.01.030) The HOC Specific Plan requires that developments have a minimum front setback of 35 feet from the edge of curb (nine feet from the required Boulevard Landscape Easement) while also allowing for the encroachment of uninhabitable building elements, such as chimneys and eaves, up to four feet into the required setback areas. The following table indicates the required setback and the proposed waiver for the two buildings for which waivers are requested. Building Required Front Setback Proposed Front Setback The applicant states that imposing the front setback requirements would result in the elimination of units, reduced floor areas of units, or a substantial change to the design of the buildings, which is not consistent with the project as proposed. 3. Side Setbacks (HOC Specific Plan Section 1.01.030) The HOC Specific Plan requires that developments have a minimum side setback of one-half of the height of the building, or ten feet, whichever is greater. It also allows for the encroachment of uninhabitable building elements, such as chimneys and eaves, up to three feet into the required setback areas. The following table indicates the required setback and the proposed waiver for the 15 buildings for which waivers are requested: Detached SFD Bldgs. (Northern end of Parcel, closer to Alves Dr.)Height Required Side Setback Proposed Side Setback Townhome Bldgs. (Southern end of Parcel, closer to Height Required Side Setback Proposed Side 200 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 200 of 2882 13 The applicant states that imposing the side setback requirements would result in the elimination of units, reduced floor areas of units, or a substantial change to the design of the buildings, which is not consistent with the project as proposed. 4. Side-Yard Setback to Second Story Deck and Patio (CMC 19.36.070(E)(2) The Municipal Code 19.36.070(E)(2) requires a 15-foot side-yard setback for second story decks and patios. As shown in Exhibit 1, Sheet A0.15, application of this standard would result in the loss of fifteen units. Absent this waiver, the Project could not fit as many residential units, thereby physically precluding construction of the proposed development at the density and with the incentives and concessions permitted by the SDBL. (Gov. Code, § 65915(e)). 5. Rear Setback (HOC Specific Plan Section 1.01.030) The HOC Specific Plan requires that developments have a minimum rear setback of one-and- one-half of the height of the building, or 20 feet, whichever is greater. It also allows for the encroachment of uninhabitable building elements, such as chimneys and eaves, up to three feet into the required setback areas. The following table indicates the required setback and the proposed waiver for the eleven buildings for which waivers are requested: Building Height Required Rear Setback Proposed Rear Setback The applicant states that imposing the rear setback requirement would result in the elimination of units, reduced floor areas of units, or a substantial change to the design of the buildings, which is not consistent with the project as proposed by the applicant. 6. Rear-Yard Setback to Second Story Deck and Patio (CMC § 19.36.070(E)(3)) The Municipal Code 19.36.070(E)(3) requires a 20-foot rear-yard setback for second story decks and patios. As shown on Exhibit 1, Sheet A0.14, application of this standard would result in the loss of five units. Absent this waiver, the Project could not fit as many residential units, thereby physically precluding construction of the proposed development at the density and with the incentives and concessions permitted by the SDBL. (Gov. Code, § 65915(e)). 201 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 201 of 2882 14 7. Building Forms (HOC Specific Plan Section 1.01.040) The HOC Specific Plan requires that buildings adjacent to residentially developed parcels be stepped back, or terraced, or have adequate setbacks so that privacy is maintained. It also requires that buildings requiring terracing shall have a 1.5:1 setback to height ratio. The proposal includes eleven buildings (Buildings 1-3, 17, 18 & 36-41) located adjacent to residential use to the west. While the project has been designed to address potential privacy concerns through building orientation and landscape screening, it does not meet the HOC Specific Plan’s required side setback and is therefore not consistent with this requirement. The applicant has requested a waiver to allow for a reduced side setback and waiver of requirements for step backs for Buildings 1, 2, 17, 18 & 37-40. Like the preceding required setback waivers, the applicant states that imposing the building form requirement would result in the elimination of units, reduced floor areas of units, or a substantial change to the design of the buildings, which is not consistent with the project proposed by the applicant. 8. Contextual Roof Plans and Setbacks (HOC Specific Plan 1.01.030 (C)(3)) The HOC Specific Plan allows building eaves to encroach up to three feet into setbacks. Eaves at front, side and rear setbacks encroach further than three feet into required setbacks. As shown on Exhibit 1, Sheet A0.18, compliance with this standard would result in the loss of thirty residential units. Absent this waiver, the project could not fit as many residential units, thereby physically precluding construction of the proposed development at the density and with the incentives and concessions permitted by the SDBL. (Gov. Code, § 65915(e)). 9. Maximum Lot Coverage (CMC Section 19.36.070 (A)) The Municipal Code requires that a development subject to the requirements of the R-3 zoning district has a maximum lot coverage of 40% of the net lot area. The proposed project has a net lot area of 6.84 acres, or 297,950 square feet, and would be allowed to have a maximum lot coverage of 119,180 square feet under Section 19.36.070 (A). The applicant has, therefore, requested a waiver to increase the lot coverage allowed for the project to accommodate a total lot coverage of 44% of the net lot area, or 131,197 square feet of building or surface area. Imposing the 40% lot coverage restriction would result in changing the design of the buildings, including the potential reduction in the size and number of units, which is not consistent with the project as proposed by the applicant. 10. Minimum Lot Width CMC Table 19.36.060(C) The Applicant seeks a waiver of the 70-foot minimum lot width at the front building line per CMC Table 19.36.060(C). As shown on Exhibit 1, Sheet A0.13, application of this standard would result in the loss of six units, thereby physically precluding construction of the proposed development at the density and with the incentives and concessions permitted by the SDBL. 11. Minimum Parking Space Size & Tandem Garages (CMC Section 19.124.040(A)) The Municipal Code (as of April 2024) requires that parking spaces in multiple-family developments have a 202 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 202 of 2882 15 minimum parking space size of 10 feet by 20 feet. The applicant has requested a waiver to modify this requirement to reduce the minimum parking garage dimensions for 17 units to 18.4 feet by 20 feet. Furthermore, 28 of the units are proposing tandem parking where townhomes are required to provide the standard 20 feet by 20 feet parking garage. Imposing the parking space requirement would result in changing the size and design of the buildings, including the potential increase in the project coverage, reduction in open space, or potentially the number of units which is not consistent with the project as proposed by the applicant. 12. Parking Setback (CMC Table 19.36.070(J)) The Municipal Code restricts parking within a setback area where the lot adjoins property zoned (R-1) single-family. The applicant has requested a waiver to this standard to allow parking within the private garages of buildings 1, 2, 3, and 17 as these structures fall within the minimum side setback that adjoins property zoned (R-1) single-family. Imposing the parking restriction would result in the loss of four units. Concession Requested As a density bonus project with at least 20% of units reserved for sale to moderate-income households 11, the applicant may submit to the City requests for up to one concession. Concessions allow an applicant to deviate from development regulations when such regulations have the potential to make the project economically infeasible to build. The applicant has requested one concessions as follows: 1. BMR Housing Mitigation Program Procedural Manual Section 2.3.4 The Applicant requests a concession from BMR Housing Mitigation Program Procedural Manual Section 2.3.4 to the extent it would require the Project’s affordable unit type to include four-bedroom units. Compliance with BMR Unit Comparability & Dispersion Requirements The BMR Manual requires that the BMR Units:  Shall be comparable to market-rate units in terms of unit type, number of bedrooms per unit, quality of exterior appearance and overall quality of construction.  Size should be generally representative of the unit sizes within the market-rate portion of residential project.  Interior features and finishes in affordable units shall be durable, of good quality and consistent with contemporary standards for new housing. The following table demonstrates the proposed units within the development buildings by income level, type, and size: 11 The project proposes a mix of moderate- and median-income units, as required by the City’s BMR standards. State law does not specify allowances for median-income units, however, median-income units have a higher income restriction than moderate-income units and are therefore counted towards the moderate-income unit total for the purposes of concession allowances. 203 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 203 of 2882 16 Number of Units Number of Bedrooms Average Unit Size BMR Units Townhouse Units Market-Rate Townhouse Units Market-Rate Detached-SFD 66 4 3,328 square feet The Applicant requests a concession from BMR Housing Mitigation Program Procedural Manual Section 2.3.4 to the extent it would require the project’s affordable units to include four-bedroom units. The applicant has assessed and determined that the construction of four-bedroom units has an increased construction cost and an increased sales price subsidy compared to three-bedroom units. Therefore, the requested concession would result in actual cost savings by resulting in lower construction costs and decreased subsidies. The affordable units would be included in the townhome product type because the proposed density bonus project only includes four-bedroom detached units. Consistent with BMR Manual 2.3.4, after accounting for the requested concession, the affordable units would be dispersed through all seven townhouse buildings and comparable through the portions of the Project including three-bedroom units. Additionally, there is no indication on the plans that the exterior finishes of the BMR units will be any different from the market rate units. As such, it is expected that they will be of the same quality; however, as allowed in the BMR manual, the affordable units may have different interior finishes. No Net Loss Discussion (SB166) California Government Code Section 65863 (No Net Loss Law) requires cities to ensure development opportunities remain available to accommodate the City’s regional housing need allocation (RHNA), especially for lower- and moderate- income households by maintaining adequate sites to accommodate the unmet RHNA for each income category. Through the 6th Cycle Housing Element’s adoption in May 2024, the City designated new Priority Housing Sites, which are anticipated to provide the units to meet the City’s RHNA for each income category. The City estimated the number of units, by income category, that are expected to be developed on each of these sites, resulting in the estimated unit counts shown in the table below. As noted previously, one of the four parcels (APN 326-32-050) that make up this project site is listed as a Priority Housing Site (Site 9) in the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element. While the project site is not subject to the land use and housing density requirements established through the adoption of the 6th Cycle Housing Element (see SB 330 discussion above), the City is nonetheless required to evaluate the project’s impacts on expected housing production under Government Code Section 65863. Under No Net Loss Law, at the time of a project’s approval, the decision-making body must make the following findings: 1. That the remaining sites identified in the Housing Element are adequate to meet the jurisdiction’s remaining RHNA for the planning period, by income category. 204 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 204 of 2882 17 2. A quantification of the remaining unmet need for the jurisdiction’s RHNA at each income level and the remaining capacity of sites identified in the Housing Element, to accommodate that need by income level. In the event the City is unable to make the findings of No Net Loss, the City must either concurrently with, or within 180 days of approval of a housing development project at a lower density or different mix of housing affordability, identify another Priority Housing Site(s) or increase the density of an existing Priority Housing Site(s) to ensure that adequate sites are available to accommodate its RHNA. The table below quantifies the remaining unmet need for the 6th Cycle Housing Element 2023- 2031 RHNA, by income level, and the remaining capacity across all Priority Housing Sites by comparing the projected number of units for this Priority Housing Site with the actual number of units proposed by the subject project.   Income Category Lower Income (30-80% AMI)* Moderate (80- 120% AMI) Above Moderate 6th Cycle RHNA Requirement 1,880 755 1,953 Approved Projects* Projected 756 153 1,535 Actual 272 39 1,299 Change -484 -114 -236 Unmet 6th Overall Units Projected before project 1,281 694 1,462 Overall Surplus/deficit before project -327 -22 808 Stevens Creek Office Center (Partial) Element Site 9) Projected 21 8 22 Proposed 0 10 14 Change -21 +2 -8 Unmet 6th * Approved projects include – SummerHill (Fontana’s, etc.); Toll Brothers (United Furniture); Dividend Homes I & II (Partial); Mary Avenue Villas (Charities Housing); Vallco Town Center/The Rise; and As indicated in the table, the City will not be able to make the findings of No Net Loss with the approval of this project. The Housing Element estimated eight Moderate (the ”Moderate” designation, as used in the Housing Element, includes both Moderate- and Median-income units) units and 21 Lower-income units would be developed on Priority Housing Site 9. While a total of 24 Moderate and zero Lower Income units are proposed with the project, meeting the requirements of the City’s BMR Housing Mitigation Manual and allowing the project to utilize 205 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 205 of 2882 18 SDBL, only ten of the Moderate-income units are located on Site 9. The remaining 14 units proposed on Site 9 are Above-moderate income units. This results in a further deficit of 21 Lower- income units and an increase of two Moderate-income units, as shown in the table below. With the proposed project, the City remains unable to make the findings for No Net Loss and will continue the separate process of identifying additional Priority Housing Sites. Other Department/Agency Review The City’s Building Division, Public Works Department, Environmental Services Division, Sheriff’s Department, Cupertino Sanitary District, and the Santa Clara County Fire Department have reviewed and conditioned the project. Environmental Review California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The applicant requested that the development be reviewed in accordance with Assembly Bill (AB) 130, signed into law on June 30, 2025, and codified in Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.66. This law exempts qualifying infill housing development from CEQA review, creating a new statutory exemption. This exemption applies to any required permits, entitlements, or other discretionary approvals for a broad range of housing types. The attached CEQA Exemption Memorandum (Attachment 7) demonstrates that the proposed project meets the requirements of PRC Section 21080.66 and is organized as follows:  Infill Criteria. The project’s consistency with the allowed housing development type defined in PRC Section 21080.66(a), subdivisions (1) through (5) and (8).  Environmental Criteria. The project’s consistency with the individual environmental requirements pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(a), subdivisions (6) and (7).  Tribal Cultural Resources. The project’s consistency with the tribal notification and outreach requirements pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(b).  Hazardous Materials. The project’s consistency with the requirements for the identification and treatment of hazardous materials pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(c).  Other Requirements. The project’s consistency with the Labor Code requirements and eligibility of a housing development project for a density bonus, incentives or concessions, waivers or reductions of development standards, and reduced parking ratios pursuant to PRC Sections 21080.66(d) and (e), respectively. As analyzed in Section 3.2 of the attached CEQA Exemption Memorandum, Public Resources Code Section 21080.66, the proposed project meets the criteria for statutory exemption. Accordingly, this document finds that a Notice of Exemption is appropriate for the proposed project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15062. Planning Commission Review On March 24, 2026, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing regarding the proposed project. After a discussion of several project issues, including the number and type of Density Bonus waivers requested, the reduction in the number of onsite trees, loss of retail and relocation options for the existing tenants, issues related to an existing access easement with an adjoining property, and other topics, all Commissioners supported the project as proposed. Commissioner 206 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 206 of 2882 19 Lindskog moved, seconded by Commissioner Fung, to adopt resolutions to approve the project with no modifications to the conditions or to the recommendations; however, the motion did include a recommendation to City Council to explore additional benefits or assistance options for retail tenants that will be displaced due to this housing development and similar projects. The Commission requested Council consider items such as expedited permitting processes, consideration of reduced fees, and other opportunities for assistance for businesses impacted by seeking relocation. The motion was passed by a 5-0 vote. Prior to the Commission’s vote on the matter, the Commission received comments from six members of the public regarding several issues. The primary topic of concern was the loss of retail uses. Representatives of the retail space Voyager Coffee spoke on behalf of their business and said that while the landlord has offered relocation assistance, they were disappointed to have to look for an alternate location and expressed a desire to remain in Cupertino. Other speakers appreciated aspects of the proposed project’s design, such as the architecture design and the central common green space. One speaker spoke in favor of the need for additional housing in the community. Planning Commission requested additional information about staff outreach efforts to on-site retail tenants. Outreach to Retail tenants To date, outreach to the retail tenants has included business visits, letters, phone calls, and emails. Voyager Craft Coffee expressed interest in remaining in Cupertino and staff held two separate conversations with the business representatives. Staff is currently assisting the business in identifying potential retail sites within the city that are available or will soon become available. Staff has also provided permitting support to Voyager Craft Coffee in May 2025 and July 2025. The city is also working with the developer to understand and identify support for the retail tenants. Panera Bread has not responded to staff outreach despite multiple attempts. Staff reached out through several channels, including contacting the company’s headquarters in St. Louis, Missouri, the district manager for the Cupertino-area locations, the store manager/supervisor for the Cupertino location, and the contact information listed on their business license. Additionally, as part of the City’s business outreach program, staff conducted site visits to the project site in December 2025, January 2026, and March 2026 and shared resources and upcoming business events with the retail tenants. Public Outreach and Noticing The following table is a summary of the noticing done for this project: Notice of Public Hearing, Site Notice & Legal Ad Agenda  Site Signage (14 days prior to the hearing)  Posted on the City’s official notice bulletin board (five days prior to the hearing) 207 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 207 of 2882 20 Notice of Public Hearing, Site Notice & Legal Ad Agenda  Legal ad placed in newspaper (at least 10 days prior to the hearing)  Posted on the City of Cupertino’s website (five days prior to the hearing)  Public hearing notices were mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the The applicant completed community outreach to residents and property owners on March 20, 2025. Public Comment Several comments were received related to the project, which are attached as Attachment 8. Three of the letters were in support of the project, while four letters were not in support of the project due to the continued loss of retail uses in the community. Two letters, from the adjacent retail shopping center, requested modification to the Easement Agreement for the shared driveway and access to an existing trash enclosure. No additional letters were received prior to the preparation of this report. The City is unable to make findings to deny the proposed project. A condition of approval is already in the draft resolutions to address a continued ingress/egress easement on the southeast corner of the project site. The remainder of the issues raised may be resolved by the two parties at a later date. Reasons for Recommendation and Available Options Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the project, as proposed, because the project and its conditions of approval support the findings for approval of the proposed project, consistent with Chapters 14.18, 18.28, 19.56, 19.156, and 19.168 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. Sustainability Impact The project was reviewed by the Sustainability Division and the applicant completed the required Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist. The project has been found to be exempt from CEQA through a Statutory Exemption and therefore it is expected that there will be no sustainability impact. Fiscal Impact No fiscal impact. City Work Program (CWP) Item/Description None Council Goal: Housing. California Environmental Quality Act 208 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 208 of 2882 21 As discussed in the Background section of this report, the project is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.66. _____________________________________ Prepared by: Shelby Maples, Senior Planner Reviewed by: Luke Connolly, Assistant Director of Community Development Benjamin Fu, Director of Community Development Floy Andrews, Interim City Attorney Approved for Submission by: Tina Kapoor, City Manager Attachments: A – Draft Resolution for U-2024-008 B – Draft Resolution for ASA-2024-011 C – Draft Resolution for TM-2024-006 D – Draft Resolution for TR-2024-033 E – Summary of Relevant State Law F – Arborist Report and Peer Review G – CEQA Exemption and Memorandum H – Public Comment I – Project Site Plan and Renderings J - Complete Plan Set 209 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 209 of 2882 RESOLUTION NO. 26-___ A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A USE PERMIT FOR A NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CONSISTING OF 56-TOWNHOME-CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND 66 SMALL LOT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, ON FOUR CONTIGUOUS PARCELS TOTALING 6.93-ACRES, INCLUDING TREE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENTS LOCATED AT 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 STEVENS CREEK BLVD; APNs: 326-32-050, -051, -052, & -053 SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: U-2024-008 Applicant: Kevin Choy (Harvest Properties) Property Owner: Blair Volckmann Location: 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd; APNs: 326-32- 050, -051, -052, and -053 SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR A USE PERMIT: WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use Permit as described in Section I of this resolution; and WHEREAS, the project is determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines because the proposed project would meet the requirements of the Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.66(a); and WHEREAS, on March 24, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to receive staff’s presentation and public testimony, and to consider the information contained in the Exemption Memorandum along with all staff reports, other pertinent documents, and all written and oral statements received prior to and at the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on March 24, 2026 the Planning Commission recommended on a 5-0 vote that the City Council approve the Use Permit (U-2024-008) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-11), approve the Architectural and Site Approval Permit (ASA-2024-011) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-12), approve the Vesting Tentative Map (TM-2024-006) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-13), and approve the Tree Removal Permit (TR-2024-033), in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-14); and 210 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 210 of 2882 Resolution No. 26-___ Page 2 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission motion included a recommendation to City Council to explore additional benefits or assistance options for retail tenants that will be displaced due to this housing development and similar projects. The Planning Commission requested that the City Council, as a matter of establishing policy, consider items such as expedited permitting processes, consideration of reduced fees, and other opportunities for assistance for businesses impacted by seeking relocation; and WHEREAS, all necessary public notices having been given as required by the City of Cupertino Municipal Code and the Government Code, and the Planning Commission held at least one public hearing in regard to this application, and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino is the decision-making body for this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support the application for a Use Permit; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds as follows with regard to this application: 1. The proposed development, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; The project is consistent with the land use designations in the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and the Heart of the City Specific Plan. It has been designed to locate townhome development closer to Stevens Creek Blvd. and transitioning to small -lot detached single- family development to the north along Alves Dr. similar to the surrounding single-family residential uses located north-west of the site. The proposed landscaping will be compatible with the existing streetscape and Heart of the City standards. The project is conditioned to comply with the Environmental Protection Standards of Cupertino Municipal Code. Chapter 17.04. The project has access to all utilities including sewer, water etc. The project must meet all Fire and Building Code requirements, which will be further reviewed prior to issuance of building permits. Therefore, the project will not be detrimental or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience. 2. The proposed development and/or use will be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Cupertino Comprehensive General Plan, underlying zoning regulations, and the purpose of this title and complies with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The SB330 Preliminary Application was submitted for this project in April 2024, locking in the development standards in effect at that time. The General Plan land use designation for the property was Commercial/Office/Residential with a maximum residential density 211 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 211 of 2882 Resolution No. 26-___ Page 3 of 25 dwelling units per acre. The residential use at the proposed 17.84 dwelling units per acre is consistent with the General Plan in terms of density pursuant to state law, even though one of the parcels currently has a residential land use density that is higher at the date of approval of this project. The applicant is requesting waivers for the development of this site to allow residential uses, with reduced setbacks, increased building height, increased building forms (massing), increased lot coverage, and reduced minimum lot width, as required by the Heart of the City Specific Plan’s and the City’s Municipal Code standards. The proposed development has met all other applicable development standards of the Heart of the City Specific Plan. The project is further conditioned to comply with the Environmental Protection Standards of Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 17.04. In addition, under the CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(1) (Statutory Exemption), the project has been found to be Statutorily Exempt from CEQA because the proposed project would meet the requirements of the Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.66(a), as further documented in the memorandum prepared by the City’s environmental consultant, PlaceWorks. Therefore, the proposed development will be located and conducted in accordance with the General Plan and underlying zoning regulations and complies with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on PAGE 4 thereof, and those contained in all other Resolutions approved for this Project. The application for a Use Permit, Application No. U-2024-008, is hereby approved, and that the conclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application no. U-2024- 008 as set forth in the Minutes of the City Council Meeting of April 7, 2026 Meeting, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS Approval is based on the plan set entitled “20807 – 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd. Cupertino” consisting of 196 sheets labeled as, A0.01– A4.00, C1 – C26, L1.0 – L10.1, JT-1 to JT-4, PM, and SL-1 to SL-4, drawn by ktgy Architects, Gates + Associates landscape, cbg Civil Engineers Surveyors, and Radius Joint Trench, except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution. 212 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 212 of 2882 Resolution No. 26-___ Page 4 2. ACCURACY OF PROJECT PLANS The applicant/property owner is responsible to verify all pertinent property data including but not limited to property boundary locations, building setbacks, property size, building square footage, any relevant easements and/or construction records. Any misrepresentation of any property data may invalidate this approval and may require additional review. 3. CONCURRENT APPROVAL CONDITIONS The conditions of approval contained in file nos. TM-2024-006, ASA-2024-011, and TR-2024-033 shall be applicable to this approval. 4. ANNOTATION OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The conditions of approval set forth shall be incorporated into and annotated on the first page of the building plans. 5. USE APPROVAL AND PROJECT AMENDMENTS Approval is hereby granted to allow a residential use in a Planned Development zone that was not allocated units as a Priority Housing Site at the time of Preliminary Application submission under the Housing Crisis Act. The Planning Commission shall review amendments to the project considered major by the Director of Community Development. 6. DENSITY BONUS WAIVERS AND CONCESSIONS As allowed through the state’s Density Bonus law, the project is eligible for one concession and unlimited waivers, as approved via this permit. The project is granted one concession and 12 waivers as requested and indicated on the approved project plans follows: a. Concession to address different unit type for BMR units; and b. Waiver to deviate from the 45-foot height limitation in the Heart of the City (HOC) Specific Plan; and c. Waiver to deviate from the front setback identified in the HOC Specific Plan; and d. Waiver to deviate from the side setback identified in the HOC Specific Plan; and e. Waiver to deviate from the rear setback identified in the HOC Specific Plan; and f. Waiver to deviate from the building forms requirement in the HOC Specific Plan; and g. Waiver to deviate from the building eave encroachment standard in the HOC Specific Plan; and 213 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 213 of 2882 Resolution No. 26-___ Page 5 h. Waiver to deviate from the maximum lot coverage percentage identified in the Cupertino Municipal Code; and i. Waiver to deviate from the minimum lot width development standard identified in the Cupertino Municipal Code; and j. Waiver to deviate from the minimum parking space size and use of tandem garages development standards identified in the Cupertino Municipal Code; and k. Waiver to deviate from the parking setback identified in the Cupertino Municipal Code. 7. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS The applicant is responsible to consult with other departments and/or agencies with regard to the proposed project for additional conditions and requirements. Any misrepresentation of any submitted data may invalidate an approval by the Community Development Department. 8. INDEMNIFICATION As part of the application, to the fullest extent permitted by law, the applicant shall agree to indemnify, defend with the attorneys of the City’s choice, and hold harmless the City, its City Council, and its officers, employees, and agents (collectively, the “indemnified parties”) from and against any liability, claim, action, cause of action, suit, damages, judgment, lien, levy, or proceeding (collectively referred to as “proceeding”) brought by a third party against one or more of the indemnified parties or one or more of the indemnified parties and the applicant related to any Ordinance, Resolution, or action approving the project, the related entitlements, environmental review documents, finding or determinations, or any other permit or approval authorized for the project. The indemnification shall include but not be limited to damages, fees, and costs awarded against the City, if any, and cost of suit, attorneys’ fees, and other costs, liabilities, and expenses incurred in connection with such proceeding whether incurred by the Applicant, the City, or the parties initiating or bring ing such proceeding. The applicant shall agree to (without limitation) reimburse the City its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. Such attorneys’ fees and costs shall include amounts paid to the City’s outside counsel and shall include City Attorney time and overhead costs and other City staff overhead costs and any costs directly related to the litigation reasonably incurred by City. The applicant shall likewise agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the indemnified parties from and against any damages, attorneys’ fees, or costs awards, including attorneys’ fees awarded under Code of Civil Procedure section 214 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 214 of 2882 Resolution No. 26-___ Page 6 1021.5, assessed or awarded against the indemnified parties. The Applicant shall cooperate with the City to enter a Reimbursement Agreement to govern any such reimbursement. The Applicant shall agree to (without limitation) reimburse the City for all costs incurred in additional investigation or study of, or for supplementing, redrafting, revising, or amending, any document (such as an Environmental Impact Report, negative declaration, specific plan, or general plan amendment) if made necessary by proceedings challenging the project approvals and related environmental review, if the applicant desires to continue to pursue the project. The Applicant shall agree that the City shall have no liability to the Applicant for business interruption, punitive, speculative, or consequential damages. 9.NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS, OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of April, 2026, by the following vote: Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 215 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 215 of 2882 Resolution No. 26-___ Page 7 SIGNED: Kitty Moore, Mayor City of Cupertino Date ATTEST: Lauren Sapudar, City Clerk Date 216 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 216 of 2882 RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING AN ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL PERMIT FOR A NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CONSISTING OF 56- TOWNHOME-CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND 66 SMALL LOT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, ON FOUR CONTIGUOUS PARCELS TOTALING 6.93-ACRES, INCLUDING TREE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENTS LOCATED AT 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 STEVENS CREEK BLVD; APNs: 326-32-050, -051, -052, & -053 SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: ASA-2024-011 Applicant: Kevin Choy (Harvest Properties) Property Owner: Blair Volckmann Location: 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd; APNs: 326-32-050, -051, -052, and -053 SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE APPROVAL WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for an Architectural and Site Approval Permit as described in Section I of this resolution; and WHEREAS, the project is determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines because the proposed project would meet the requirements of the Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.66(a); and WHEREAS, on March 24, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to receive staff’s presentation and public testimony, and to consider the information contained in the Exemption Memorandum along with all staff reports, other pertinent documents, and all written and oral statements received prior to and at the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on March 24, 2026 the Planning Commission recommended on a 5-0 vote that the City Council approve the Use Permit (U-2024-008) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-11), approve the Architectural and Site Approval Permit (ASA-2024-011) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-12), approve the Vesting Tentative Map (TM-2024-006) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-13), and 217 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 217 of 2882 approve the Tree Removal Permit (TR-2024-033), in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-14); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission motion included a recommendation to City Council to explore additional benefits or assistance options for retail tenants that will be displaced due to this housing development and similar projects. The Planning Commission requested that the City Council, as a matter of establishing policy, consider items such as expedited permitting processes, consideration of reduced fees, and other opportunities for assistance for businesses impacted by seeking relocation ; and WHEREAS, all necessary public notices having been given as required by the City of Cupertino Municipal Code and the Government Code, and the Planning Commission held at least one public hearing in regard to this application; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino is the decision -making body for this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support the application for an Architectural and Site Approval Permit; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds as follows with regard to this application: 1. The proposal, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; The project is consistent with the land use designations in the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and the Heart of the City Specific Plan. It has been designed to locate townhome development closer to Stevens Creek Blvd. and transitioning to small -lot detached single- family development to the north along Alves Dr. similar to the surrounding single -family residential uses located north-west of the site. The proposed landscaping will be compatible with the existing streetscape and Heart of the City standards. The project is conditioned to comply with the Environmental Protection Standards of Cupertino Municipal Code. Chapter 17.04. The project has access to all utilities including sewer, water etc. The project must meet all Fire and Building Code requirements, which will be further reviewed prior to issuance of building permits. Therefore, the project will not be detrimental or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to public health, safety, general welfare, or conven ience. 2. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of Chapter 19.168, the General Plan, any specific plan, zoning ordinances, applicable planned development permit, conditional use permits, variances, subdivision maps or other entitlements to use which regulate the subject property including, but not limited to, adherence to the following specific criteria: 218 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 218 of 2882 a) Abrupt changes in building scale should be avoided. A gradual transition related to height and bulk should be achieved between new and existing buildings. Several of the buildings proposed are taller than the maximum height allowed by the zoning district and have setbacks smaller than those required by the zoning district since provisions of state law allow the applicant to waive development standards which would otherwise preclude the applicant from building the project they designed. The City does not have the ability to require changes to the project as designed to comply with either the maximum height limitations or minimum setback requirements. However, the proposed townhomes and detached single-family dwellings are proposing to plant trees along Stevens Creek Boulevard and Alves drive, in accordance with the Heart of the City Specific Plan, for visual screening. b) In order to preserve design harmony between new and existing building and in order to preserve and enhance property values, the materials, textures and colors of new building should harmonize with adjacent development by being consistent or compatible with design and color schemes with the future character of the neighborhoods and purposes of the zone in which they are situated. The location, height and materials of walls, fencing, hedges and screen planting should harmonize with adjacent development. Unsightly storage areas, utility installations and unsightly elements of parking lots should be concealed. The planting of ground cover or various types of pavements should be used to prevent dust and erosion, and the unnecessary destruction of existing healthy trees should be avoided. Lighting for development should be adequate to meet safety requirements as specified by the engineering and building departments, and provide shielding to prevent spill-over light to adjoining property owners. The buildings meet the design qualities of a contemporary Spanish , Modern French and Craftsman design development. The architectural style alternates between the three styles throughout the site. Crosswalks throughout the site will be delineated with an Ashl ar pattern stamped asphalt in earthtone shades. The applicant will continue the decorative brick paving within the public right-of-way along Stevens Creek Blvd, continuing the decorative paving from 20807 Steven’s Creek Blvd to 20955 Steven Creek Blvd. T his improvement will complete the decorative brick pavers along the entire frontage of the project site. The 6 existing Callery Pear street trees along Steven’s Creek Blvd. are proposed to be retained and protected in place. The species is consistent with the requirements of the Heart of the City Specific Plan “flowering orchard” planting theme. The mature trees will help to screen the building mass along Steven’s Creek Blvd. Lighting for the development will be reviewed as part of the project construction documents to ensure that they meet safety requirements while avoiding spill-over light to adjacent properties and meet applicable Dark Sky standards. The proposed windows are consistent with the City’s bird - safe ordinance as well. 219 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 219 of 2882 c) The number, location, color, size, height, lighting and landscaping of outdoor advertising signs and structures shall minimize traffic hazards and shall positively affect the general appearance of the neighborhood and harmonize with adjacent development; and No signage is proposed as part of this project. d) With respect to new projects within existing residential neighborhoods, new development should be designed to protect residents from noise, traffic, light and visually intrusive effects by use of buffering, setbacks, landscaping, walls and other appropriate design measures. While the project abuts an existing single-family residential neighborhood to the north- west, it is surrounded on all other sides by commercial uses. The townhome buildings have been designed in accordance with many of the non -objective design guidelines outlined in the Heart of the City Specific Plan. Further, the project has provided a new parkway between the street curb and the new sidewalk, that did not exist before. The parkway will set the sidewalk back from the street to provide additional safety buffer to pedestrians from vehicles. Additionally, the project incorporates a double row of trees planted along Alves Dr. to provide shade and seasonal foliage within the neighborhood. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution, beginning on PAGE 4 herein, and subject to the conditions contained in all other Resolutions approved for this Project. The application for an Architectural and Site Approval, Application No. ASA-2024-011, is hereby approved, and that the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application no. ASA-2024-011 as set forth in the Minutes of the City Council Meeting of April 7, 2026 Meeting, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS Approval is based on the plan set entitled “20807 – 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd. Cupertino” consisting of 196 sheets labeled as, A0.01– A4.00, C1 – C26, L1.0 – L10.1, JT-1 to JT-4, PM, and SL-1 to SL-4, drawn by ktgy Architects, Gates + Associates landscape, cbg Civil Engineers Surveyors, and Radius J oint Trench, except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution. 220 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 220 of 2882 2. ACCURACY OF PROJECT PLANS The applicant/property owner is responsible to verify all pertinent property data including but not limited to property boundary locations, building setbacks, property size, building square footage, any relevant easements and/or construction records. Any misrepresentation of any property data may invalidate this approval and may require additional review. 3. CONCURRENT APPROVAL CONDITIONS The conditions of approval contained in file nos. TM-2024-006, U-2024-008, and TR-2024-033 shall be applicable to this approval. 4. ANNOTATION OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The conditions of approval set forth shall be incorporated into and annotated on the first page of the building plans. 5. DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL The project is granted approval to construct: a. 56 townhomes, with 24 townhomes dedicated as units affordable to moderate - and median-income households; b. 66 single-family homes; c. 244 garage parking spaces; d. 27 guest parking spaces; e. 122 garage bicycle spaces; f. 4 bicycle spaces in the common open space; g. Landscaping in designated locations with the use of the approved plant palate, including native and drought-tolerant plants; h. Vegetated stormwater treatment facilities with the use of native plants; i. 31,921 square feet of private open space across all units; j. 10,257 square feet of common open space; k. Screened mechanical equipment; l. Screening six-foot-tall “good neighbor” fence on the western property line and eight-foot-tall masonry wall on the eastern property line. 6. DENSITY BONUS WAIVERS AND CONCESSIONS As allowed through the state’s Density Bonus law, the project is eligible for one concession and unlimited waivers, as approved via this permit. The project is granted one concession and 12 waivers as requested and indicated on the approved project plans as follows: a. Concession to address different unit type for BMR units; and b. Waiver to deviate from the 45-foot height limitation in the Heart of the City (HOC) Specific Plan; and 221 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 221 of 2882 c. Waiver to deviate from the front setback identified in the HOC Specific Plan; and d. Waiver to deviate from the side setback identified in the HOC Specific Plan; and e. Waiver to deviate from the rear setback identified in the HOC Specific Plan; and f. Waiver to deviate from the building forms requirement in the HOC Specific Plan; and g. Waiver to deviate from the building eave encroachment standard in the HOC Specific Plan; and h. Waiver to deviate from the maximum lot coverage percentage identified in the Cupertino Municipal Code; and i. Waiver to deviate from the minimum lot width development standard identified in the Cupertino Municipal Code; and j. Waiver to deviate from the minimum parking space size and use of tandem garages development standards identified in the Cupertino Municipal Code; and k. Waiver to deviate from the parking setback identified in the Cupertino Municipal Code. 7. AFFORDABLE UNITS The project shall include 12 units affordable to median-income (80-100% of Area Median Income) households and 12 units affordable to moderate-income (100- 120% of Area Median Income) households as determined by the City’s BMR Mitigation Manual. 8. BMR AGREEMENT Prior to the recordation of a final map or issuance of any residential building permit, an affordable housing agreement shall be recorded against the property. The affordable housing agreement shall include, but not be limited to the following, in compliance with the BMR Housing Mitigation Manual: a. Total number of BMR units, type, location (site map), square footage, number of bedrooms, and construction scheduling of market-rate and BMR units; b. Provisions to ensure concurrent construction and completion of BMR units and market-rate units; c. Affordability levels for each BMR unit; d. Price for BMR units as provided for in the BMR mitigation manual; e. Provisions for income certification and screening of potential occupants of BMR units; f. Restriction control mechanism; 222 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 222 of 2882 g. Financing of ongoing administrative and monitoring costs; h. Other reasonably required provisions to implement the Affordable Housing Plan. 9. BMR UNIT TERMS OF AFFORDABILITY Prior to occupancy, the proposed project shall record covenants that require the units to be sold at prices that are affordable to moderate and median levels for a period not less than 99 years from the date of first occupancy of the unit. 10. FINAL ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS AND EXTERIOR BUILDING MATERIALS The final building exterior plan shall closely resemble the details shown on the original approved plans. The final building design and exterior treatment plans (including but not limited to details on exterior color, materials, architectural treatments, doors, windows, lighting fixtures, and/or embellishments) shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits and through an in-field mock-up of colors prior to application to ensure quality and consistency. Any exterior changes determined to be substantial by the Director of Community Development shall either require a modification to this permit or a new permit based on the extent of the change. Future changes to the exterior building materials/treatments must be reviewed and approved by the Property Owner’s Association. However, any changes to the building materials that do not match the approved materials shall require an amendment to this permit or a new permit. 11. BICYCLE PARKING The applicant shall provide bicycle parking and bike racks for the project in accordance with the approved plans and with the City’s Parking Regulations under Chapter 19.124 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 12. BUILDING AND FIRE CODE The applicant shall apply for and obtain building permits to allow the construction of the approved project. The applicant shall provide information and plans to allow the Building Official and the Fire Marshall or their designee that the proposed plans comply with Building and Fire Codes in effect at the time of application for a building permit. 13. PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN A demolition and construction management plan shall be submitted and reviewed prior to building permit issuance. Prior to commencement of construction 223 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 223 of 2882 activities, the applicant shall arrange for a pre -construction meeting with the pertinent departments (Building, Planning, and Public Works) to review the prepared construction management plan, to ensure that construction complies with the conditions of approval, staging of construction equipment is appropriate, tree protection measures are in place, public access routes are identified, and noise and dust control measures are established. The plan shall include but not be limited to the following: a. Appropriate construction staging area b. Hours of construction c. Compliance with the City noise ordinance d. Best management practices e. Staging of construction equipment shall not occur within 50 feet of any residential property. f. Any other measures as determined to be appropriate by the Director of Community Development 14. DEMOLITION REQUIREMENTS All demolished building and site materials shall be recycled to the maximum extent feasible subject to the Building Official. The applicant shall provide evidence that materials were recycled prior to issuance of final demolition permits. 15. GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION HOURS AND NOISE LIMITS a. All grading activities shall be limited to the dry season (April 15 to October 1), unless permitted otherwise by the Director of Public Works. b. Construction hours and noise limits shall be compliant with all requirements of Chapter 10.48 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. c. Grading, street construction, underground utility and demolition hours for work done more than 750 feet away from residential areas shall be limited to Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. and Saturday and Sunday, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Grading, street construction, demolition or underground utility work within 750 feet of residential areas shall not occur on Saturdays, Sundays, holidays, and during the nighttime period as defined in Section 10.48.053(b) of the Municipal Code. d. Construction activities shall be limited to Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. and Saturday and Sunday, 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. Construction activities are not allowed on holidays as defined in Chapter 10.48 of the Municipal Code. Night time construction is allowed if compliant with nighttime standards of Section 10.48 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. e. Rules and regulations pertaining to all construction activities and limitations identified in this permit, along with the name and telephone number of an 224 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 224 of 2882 applicant appointed disturbance coordinator, shall be posted in a prominent location at the entrance to the job site. f. The applicant shall be responsible for educating all contractors and subcontractors of said construction restrictions. The applicant shall comply with the above grading and construction hours and noise limit requirements unless otherwise indicated. 16. FORMATION OF A HOME OWNER’S ASSOCIATION A Home Owner’s Association shall be formed to maintain the common areas of the property. The Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development and the City Attorney prior to recordation. The following terms shall be incorporated into the Association’s Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions: ▪ The members/board shall meet at a minimum of once/year ▪ The Association dues shall cover: o Maintenance of common area on the property, in compliance with the approved project and conditions of approval, including hardscaping, landscaping (including development trees) private streets, parking, landscaping and accessory facilities and amenities, such as trash bins/areas, common amenity areas, tree grates, outside trash bins, fences, etc, o Building and site repair on a regular schedule, or as otherwise necessary, and building renovation and replacement as necessary to ensure that the property is maintained. o Permits, including tree removal permits, required for maintenance and repair of facilities and other improvements in the common areas. ▪ Any changes to the CC&R’s must be reviewed and approved by the City ▪ Disbanding of the Association shall require an amendment to the permit. 17. INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT The applicant shall record an appropriate deed restriction and covenant running with the land, subject to approval of the City Attorney, for all parcels that share a common private drive or private roadway with one or more other parcels, including the parcel to the east of the subject site, unless an easement is already recorded which provides ingress/egress for the driveway located on the south east portion of the property to the property located directly to the east of the subject site. The deed restriction shall provide for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easement to and from the affected parcels. The easements shall be recorded prior to final map recordation. 225 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 225 of 2882 18. PUBLIC ACCESS REQUIREMENTS In accordance with Mobility Element Policies M-2.5 and M-3.2 of the 2015-2040 Cupertino General Plan in effect in January 2024, the applicant shall maintain public access to the privately maintained streets and walkways where public access easements are shown on the Vesting Tentative Map. 19. PUBLIC ART REQUIREMENT Public art shall be provided for the project in accordance with General Plan Policy 2-66 and the City’s Public Art Ordinance (Chapter 19.148 of the Cupertino Municipal Code). The minimum expenditure for the artwork, including, but not limited to design, fabrication, and installation is one (1) percent of the construction valuation for valuation in excess of $100 million. The project pro forma shall be provided to the City to confirm the project budget. The public art plans (including location and design) shall be reviewed by the Fine Arts Commission during the building permit stage, in advance of final occupancy. Once approved by the Fine Arts Commission, the public artwork shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City prior to final occupancy. In the event the developer or property owner determines that the placement of artwork on a particular property may not be feasible, the developer or property owner may apply to the City for an in-lieu payment alternative as indicated in Chapter 19.148 of the Cupertino Municipal Code, subject to review of the Fine Arts Commission and the City Council. The in-lieu payment shall be 1.25% of the construction valuation. 20. PUBLIC ART MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENT In accordance with the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter 19.128, the property owner shall maintain approved public artwork in good condition continuously after its installation, as determined appropriate by the City. Maintenance shall include all related landscaping, lighting, and upkeep, including the identification plaque. Artwork required or approved cann ot be removed, except for required maintenance or repair, unless approved by the City; at which time the City may require replacement or relocation of the artwork. In the event that the artwork is relocated in the public right -of-way, a maintenance agreement with the City shall be required. 21. COMMON OPEN SPACE The residential common open space shall provide amenities for passive and/or active recreation including but not limited to play structures, barbeque areas, picnic tables etc. and shall not be retained as or converted to only a passive hardscaped or landscaped area. 226 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 226 of 2882 22. SETBACK AND LANDSCAPE AREAS Approved setback and landscaped areas shall remain free and clear of any accessory structures that have not been approved as part of this project. 23. RESIDENTIAL SCREENING COVENANT The property owner shall record a covenant on this property to inform future property owners of the residential screening measures and tree protection requirements consistent with the approved plans and reference these in the Property Owner Association documentation. The precise language will be subject to approval by the Director of Community Development. Proof of recordation must be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to final occupancy of the residence. 24. LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION REPORT The project is subject to all provisions delineated in the Landscape Ordinance (CMC, Chapter 14.15). A landscape installation audit shall be conducted by a certified landscape professional after the landscaping and irrigation system have been installed. The findings of the assessment shall be consolidated into a landscape installation report. The landscape installation report shall include but is not limited to: inspection to confirm that the landscaping and irrigation system are installed as specified in the landscape and irrigation design plan, system tune -up, system test with distribution uniformity, reporting overspray or run-off that causes overland flow, and preparation of an irrigation schedule. The landscape installation report shall include the following statement: “The landscape and irrigation system have been installed as specified in the landscape and irrigation design plan and complies with the criteria of the ordinance and the permit.” 25. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION MAINTENANCE Per the Landscape Ordinance (CMC, Chapter 14.15), a maintenance schedule shall be established and submitted to the Director of Community Development or his/her designee, either with the landscape application package, with the landscape installation report, or any time before the landscape installation report is submitted. a. Schedules should take into account water requirements for the plant establishment period and water requirements for established landscapes. b. Maintenance shall include, but not be limited to, the following: routine inspection; pressure testing, adjustment and repair of the irrigation system; aerating and de-thatching turf areas; replenishing mulch; fertilizing; pruning; 227 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 227 of 2882 replanting of failed plants; weeding; pest control; and removing obstructions to emission devices. c. Failed plants shall be replaced with the same or functionally equivalent plants that may be size-adjusted as appropriate for the stage of growth of the overall installation. Failing plants shall either be replaced or be revived through appropriate adjustments in water, nutrients, pest control or other factors as recommended by a landscaping professional. 26. LANDSCAPE PROJECT SUBMITTAL Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a full Landscape Documentation Package, per sections 14.15.050 A, B, C, and D of the Landscape Ordinance, for projects with landscape area 500 square feet or more or elect to submit a Prescriptive Compliance Application per sections 14.15.040 A, B, and C for projects with landscape area between 500 square feet and 2,500 square feet. The Landscape Documentation Package or Prescriptive Compliance Application shall be reviewed and approved to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits, and additional requirements per sections 14.15.040 D, E, F, and G or 14.15.050 E, F, G, H, and I will be required to be reviewed and approved prior to final inspections. 27. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION PLANS The applicant shall submit detailed landscape and irrigation plans to be reviewed and approved by Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. The landscape plan shall include water conservation and pesticide reduction measures in conformance with Chapter 14.15, Landscape Ordinance, and the pesticide control measures referenced in Chapter 9.18, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 28. SITE IMPROVEMENTS All proposed site improvements shall be completed prior to final occupancy of any structures approved in conjunction with the project. 29. DARK SKY COMPLIANCE AND/OR BIRD SAFE COMPLIANCE Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant/property owner shall submit final plans in compliance with the approved lighting plans to comply with development standards of Cupertino Municipal Code Section 19.102.030 Bird-Safe Development Requirements and Section 19.102.040 Outdoor Lighting Requirements. In the event changes are proposed from the approved plans, said changes must be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development or their designee. The applicant shall provide all documentation required to determine compliance with the Municipal Code. The final lighting 228 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 228 of 2882 plan (including a detailed photometric plan) shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to building permit issuance. A report from a licensed lighting engineer may be required to confirm all exterior lighting throughout the site complies with the City’s Ordinance. 30. TRANSFORMERS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY Electrical transformers, telephone cabinets and similar equipment shall be placed in underground vaults, inside buildings, or as required by PG&E. The developer must receive written approval from both the Public Works Department and the Community Development Department prior to installation of any above ground equipment. Should above ground equipment be permitted by the City, equipment and enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping such that said equipment shall not encroach into the public right of way and is not visible from public street areas, as determined by the Community Development Department Transformers shall not be located in the front or side building setback area, unless it is the only acceptable location allowed by PG&E. 31. UTILITY STRUCTURE PLAN Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall work with staff to provide a detailed utility plan to demonstrate screening or undergrounding of all new utility structures [including, but not limited to backflow preventers (BFP), fire department connections (FDC), post-indicator valves (PIV), and gas meters] to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development, Public Works, Fire Department, and applicable utility agencies. 32. EQUIPMENT SCREENING All mechanical and other equipment on the building or on the site shall be screened so they are not visible from public street areas or adjoining developments. The height of the screening shall be taller than the height of the mechanical equipment that it is designed to screen but may not exceed the overall height approved of that structure. A line of sight plan may be required to demonstrate that the equipment will not be visible from any public right -of-way. The location of the equipment and necessary screening shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to issuance of building permits. 33. VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND EMISSIONS FROM PAINT Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the Applicant shall include a note on all plans where paint specifications or other design specifications are listed, that the project design will incorporate only low-VOC paint (i.e., 50 grams per liter [g/L] or less) for interior and exterior wall architectural coatings. 229 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 229 of 2882 34. AVOID NESTING BIRDS DURING CONSTRUCTION Prior to issuance of any demolition, grading and building permit, indicate the following on all construction plans: a. Demolition, construction, ground-disturbing, and tree removal/pruning activities shall be scheduled to be completed prior to nesting season (February 1 through August 31), if feasible. b. If demolition, construction, ground-disturbing, or tree removal/pruning activities occur during the nesting season (February 1 and August 31), preconstruction surveys shall be conducted as follows: i. No more than 7 days prior to the start of demolition, construction, ground- disturbing, or tree removal/pruning activities, in order to identify any active nests with eggs or young birds on the site and surrounding area within 100 feet of construction or tree removal activities. ii. Preconstruction surveys shall be repeated at 14-day intervals until demolition, construction, ground-disturbing, or tree removal/pruning activities have been initiated in the area, after which surveys can be stopped. As part of the preconstruction survey(s ), the surveyor shall inspect all trees and other possible nesting habitats in, and immediately adjacent to, the construction areas for active nests, while ensuring that they do not disturb the nests as follows: 1) For projects that require the demolition or construction one single - family residence, ground disturbing activities affecting areas of up to 500 square feet, or the removal of up to three trees, the property owner or a tree removal contractor, if necessary, is permitted to conduct the preconstruction surveys to identify if there are any active nests. If any active nests with eggs or young birds are identified, the project applicant shall retain a qualified ornithologist or biologist to identify protective measures. 2) For any other demolition, construction and ground disturbing activity or the removal of four or more trees, a qualified ornithologist or biologist shall be retained by the project applicant to conduct the preconstruction surveys. iii. If the preconstruction survey does not identify any active nests with eggs or young birds that would be affected by demolition, construction, ground- disturbing or tree removal/pruning activities, no further mitigating action is required. If an active nest containing eggs or young birds is found sufficiently close to work areas to be disturbed by these activities, their locations shall be documented, and the qualified ornithologist or biologist shall identify protective measures to be implemented under their direction until the nests no longer contain eggs or young birds. 230 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 230 of 2882 iv. Protective measures may include, but are not limited to, establishment of clearly delineated exclusion zones (i.e., demarcated by identifiable fencing, such as orange construction fencing or equivalent) around each nest location as determined by the qualified ornithologist or biologist, taking into account the species of birds nesting, their tolerance for disturbance and proximity to existing development. In general, exclusion zones shall be a minimum of 300 feet for raptors and 75 feet for passerines and other birds. The active nest within an exclusion zone shall be monitored on a weekly basis throughout the nesting season to identify signs of disturbance and confirm nesting status. The radius of an exclusion zone may be increased by the qualified ornithologist or biologist, if project activities are determined to be adversely affecting the nesting birds. Exclusion zones may be reduced by the qualified ornithologist or biologist only in consultation with California Department of Fish and Wildlife. The protection measures and buffers shall remain in effect until the young have left the nest and are foraging independently or the nest is no longer active. v. A final report on nesting birds and raptors, including survey methodology, survey date(s), map of identified active nests (if any), and protection measures (if required), shall be prepared by the qualified ornithologist or biologist and submitted to the Director of Community Development or his or her designee, through the appropriate permit review process (e.g., demolition, construction, tree removal, etc.), and be completed to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director prior to the start of demolition, construction, ground-disturbing, or tree removal/pruning activities. 35. NOISE LEVELS AND ABATEMENT Project uses and all equipment installed on the site shall comply with the City’s Community Noise Control Ordinance at all times. Installation of any mechanical or other equipment shall be evaluated to determine that the installation meets the City’s Community Noise Control Ordinance. Any documentation or studies required to determine this shall be provided by the applicant as his/her sole expense. Should the project exceed any of the stipulated maximum noise levels outlined in the City’s Community Noise Control Ordinance, an acoustical engineer may be required to submit noise attenuation measures to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development at the applicant’s expense. 231 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 231 of 2882 36. NOISE AND VIBRATION NOTICE At least 10 days prior to the start of any demolition, ground disturbing , or construction activities, the project applicant/contractor shall send notices of the planned activity by first class mail as follows: a. For projects on sites that are more than 0.5 acres or four or more residential units the notices shall be sent to off-site businesses and residents within 500 feet of the project site; b. For projects on sites between 0.25 to 0.5 acres, or two or three residential units (not including Accessory Dwelling Units) notices shall be sent to off -site businesses and residents within 250 feet of the project site; or c. For projects on sites less than 0.25 acres or one residential unit, the notices shall be sent to off-site businesses and residents within 100 feet of the project site. The notification shall include a brief description of the project, the activities that would occur, the hours when activity would occur, and the construction period’s overall duration. The notification should include the telephone numbers of the contractor’s authorized representatives that are assigned to respond in the event of a noise or vibration complaint. The City will provide mailing addresses for the Applicant’s use. The project applicant shall provide the City with evidence of mailing of the notice, upon request. If pile driving, see additional noticing requirements below. 37. NOISE AND VIBRATION SIGNAGE At least 10 days prior to the start of any demolition, ground disturbing, or construction activities, the project applicant/contractor shall ensure that a sign measuring at least four feet by six feet shall be posted on construction fencing at the entrance(s) to the job site, clearly visible to the public, and include the following: a. Permitted construction days and hours; b. A description of proposed construction activities; c. Telephone numbers of the City’s and contractor’s authorized representatives that are assigned to respond in the event of a noise or vibration complaint; and d. Contact information for City’s and contractor’s authorized representatives that are assigned to respond in the event of a complaint related to fugitive dust, pursuant to the requirements for compliance with BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. If the authorized contractor’s representative receives a complaint, they shall investigate, take appropriate corrective action, and report the complaint and the action taken to the City within three business days of receiving the complaint. 232 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 232 of 2882 38. NOISE DURING CONSTRUCTION Prior to issuance of any demolition, grading or building permit, include on plans a note that, during project construction, the project applicant shall incorporate the following measures to reduce noise during construction and demolition activity: a. The project applicant and contractors shall prepare and submit a Construction Noise Control Plan to the City’s Planning Department for review and approval prior to issuance of the first permit. The Construction Noise Plan shall demonstrate compliance with daytime and nighttime decibel limits pursuant to Chapter 10.48 (Community Noise Control) of Cupertino Municipal Code. The details of the Construction Noise Control Plan shall be included in the applicable construction documents and implemented by the on -site Construction Manager. Noise reduction measures selected and implemented shall be based on the type of construction equipment used on the site, distance of construction activities from sensitive receptor(s), site terrain, and other features on and surrounding the site (e.g., trees, built environment) and may include, but not be limited to, temporary construction noise attenuation walls, high quality mufflers. During the entire active construction period, the Construction Noise Control Plan shall demonstrate that compliance with the specified noise control requirements for construction equipment and tools will reduce construction noise in compliance with the City’s daytime and nighttime decibel limits. b. Select haul routes that avoid the greatest amount of sensitive use areas and submit to the City of Cupertino Public Works Department for approval prior to the start of the construction phase. c. Signs will be posted at the job site entrance(s), within the on -site construction zones, and along queueing lanes (if any) to reinforce the prohibition of unnecessary engine idling. All other equipment will be turned off if not in use for more than 5 minutes. d. During the entire active construction period and to the extent feasible, the use of noise producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells will be for safety warning purposes only. The construction manager will use smart back-up alarms, which automatically adjust the alarm level based on the background noise level or switch off back-up alarms and replace with human spotters in compliance with all safety requirements and law. 39. EXCESSIVE NOISE AND VIBRATIONS Per General Plan Policy HS-8.3, construction contractors shall use the best available technology to minimize excessive noise and vibration from construction equipment such as pile drivers, jack hammers, and vibratory rollers during construction. 233 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 233 of 2882 40. FUGITIVE DUST CONTROL Prior to issuance of the any demolition, grading, or building permit, include on all permit plans, the full text of each of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s Basic Control Measures from the latest version of BAAQMD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, as subsequently revised, supplemented, or replaced, to control fugitive dust (i.e., particulate matter PM2.5 and PM10) during demolition, ground disturbing activities and/or construction. 41. CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBAL PROTECTIONS Prior to issuance of any demolition, grading, or building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development that the project complies with the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21080.66. Compliance with this condition shall be ongoing throughout all ground- disturbing and restoration activities. If requested by a California Native American tribe traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area, the Applicant shall retain and fund tribal monitoring during all ground-disturbing activities. The designated tribal monitor shall be selected by the tribe and shall comply with the applicant’s site access and workplace safety requirements. The applicant shall compensate the tribal monitor at a reasonable rate, determined in good faith, that aligns with customary compensation for cultural resource monitoring, taking into account factors such as the scope and duration of the project. Tribal cultural resources shall be avoided where feasible, in accordance with subdivision (a) of Section 21084.3. In furtherance of this requirement, where feasible, the project applicant shall provide deference to tribal preferences regarding access to spiritual, ceremonial, and burial sites, and incorporate tribal traditional knowledge in the protection and sustainable use of tribal cultural resources and landscapes. All identification, treatment, and documentation of tribal cultural resources shall be conducted in a culturally appropriate manner consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21083.9. Prior to permit issuance, the Applicant shall complete a California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) archaeological records search and a tribal cultural records search for the project site and shall submit a Sacred Lands Inventory Request to the Native American Heritage Commission. The project shall comply with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and Public Resources Code Section 5097.98, including immediate cessation of work in the event of the discovery of human remains or burial resources and 234 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 234 of 2882 treatment in accordance with applicable law and consultation with the appropriate California Native American tribe. Where applicable to the environmental context of the site, the applicant shall incorporate tribal ecological knowledge into any habitat restoration or landscape management measures associated with the project. 42. ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Prior to the issuance of any demolition, grading or building permit involving soil disturbance, the project applicant shall provide written verification, including the materials provided to contractors and construction crews, to the City confirming that contractors and construction crews have been notified of basic archaeological site indicators, the potential for discovery of archaeological resources, laws pertaining to these resources, and procedures for protecting these resources as follows: a. Basic archaeological site indicators that may include, but are not limited to, darker than surrounding soils of a friable nature; evidence of fires (ash, charcoal, fire affected rock or earth); concentrations of stone, bone, or shellfish; artifacts of stone, bone, or shellfish; evidence of living surfaces (e.g., floors); and burials, either human or animal. b. The potential for undiscovered archaeological resources or tribal cultural resources on site. c. The laws protecting these resources and associated penalties, including, but not limited to, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990, Public Resources Code Section 5097, and California Health and Safety Code Section 7050 and Section 7052. d. The protection procedures to follow should construction crews discover cultural resources during project-related earthwork, include the following: i. All soil disturbing work within 25 feet of the find shall cease. ii. The project applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to provide and implement a plan for survey, subsurface investigation, as needed, to define the deposit, and assessment of the remainder of the site within the project area to determine whether the resource is significant and would be affected by the project. iii. Any potential archaeological or tribal cultural resources found during construction activities shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation forms by a qualified archaeologist. If the resource is a tribal cultural resource, the consulting archaeologist shall consult with the appropriate tribe, as determined by the Native American Heritage Commission, to evaluate the significance of the resource and to 235 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 235 of 2882 recommend appropriate and feasible avoidance, testing, preservation or mitigation measures, in light of factors such as the significance of the find, proposed project design, costs, and other considerations. The archeologist shall perform this evaluation in consultation with the tribe. 43. HUMAN REMAINS AND NATIVE AMERICAN BURIALS Prior to issuance of the any demolition, grading and building permits that involve soil disturbance, include on plans a note that, during project construction, the project applicant shall comply with California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 and California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. a. In the event of discovering human remains during construction activities, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site within a 100-foot radius of the remains, or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains. b. The Santa Clara County Coroner shall be notified immediately and shall make a determination as to whether the remains are Native American. c. If the Santa Clara County Coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his authority, he shall notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. d. The NAHC shall attempt to identify descendants (Most Likely Descendant) of the deceased Native American. e. The Most Likely Descendant has 48 hours following access to the project site to make recommendations or preferences regarding the disposition of the remains. If the Most Likely Descendant does not make recommendations within 48 hours after being allowed access to the project site, the owner shall, with appropriate dignity, reinter the remains in an area of the property secure from further disturbance and provide documentation about this determination and the location of the remains to the NAHC and the City of Cupertino. Alternatively, if the owner does not accept the Most Likely Descendant’s recommendations, the owner or the descendent may request mediation by the NAHC. Construction shall halt until the mediation has concluded. 44. GREEN BUILDING The project shall be constructed in accordance with the City’s Green Building Ordinance (Chapter 16.58 of the Cupertino Municipal Code). The applicant shall obtain LEED Silver certification, be GPR certified at a minimum of 50 points, or an alternative reference standard in accordance with the ordinance since the building size is over 50,000 square feet. Third party LEED or GPR certification or alternative reference standard is required per the ordinance criteria and costs associated with third-party review shall be paid by the applicant. 236 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 236 of 2882 45. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS The applicant is responsible to consult with other departments and/or agencies with regard to the proposed project for additional conditions and requirements. Any misrepresentation of any submitted data may invalidate an approval by the Community Development Department. 46. INDEMNIFICATION As part of the application, to the fullest extent permitted by law, the applicant shall agree to indemnify, defend with the attorneys of the City’s choice, and hold harmless the City, its City Council, and its officers, employees, and agents (collectively, the “indemnified parties”) from and against any liability, claim, action, cause of action, suit, damages, judgment, lien, levy, or proceeding (collectively referred to as “proceeding”) brought by a third party against one or more of the indemnified parties or one or more of the indemnified parties and the applicant related to any Ordinance, Resolution, or action approving the project, the related entitlements, environmental review documents, finding or determinations, or any other permit or approval authorized for the project. The indemnification shall include but not be limited to damages, fees, and costs awarded against the City, if any, and cost of suit, attorneys’ fees, and other costs, liabilities, and expenses incurred in connection with such proceedi ng whether incurred by the Applicant, the City, or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. The applicant shall agree to (without limitation) reimburse the City its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. Such attorneys’ fees and costs shall include amounts paid to the City’s outside counsel and shall include City Attorney time and overhead costs and other City staff overhead costs and any costs directly related to the litigation reasonably incurred by City. The applicant shall likewise agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the indemnified parties from and against any damages, attorneys’ fees, or costs awards, including attorneys’ fees awarded under Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5, assessed or awarded against the indemnified parties. The Applicant shall cooperate with the City to enter a Reimbursement Agreement to govern any such reimbursement. The Applicant shall agree to (without limitation) reimburse the City for all costs incurred in additional investigation or study of, or for supplementing, redrafting, revising, or amending, any document (such as an Environmental Impact Report, negative declaration, specific plan, or general plan amendment) if made necessary by proceedings challenging the project approvals and related environmental review, if the applicant desires to continue to pursue the project. 237 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 237 of 2882 The Applicant shall agree that the City shall have no liability to the Applicant for business interruption, punitive, speculative, or consequential damages. 47. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS, OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. Except for otherwise noted, the following conditions must be completed and/or submitted prior to Final Map recordation. 48. OFFSITE STORM DRAIN CONNECTIONS The City requires new development projects to connect to the City storm drain system via a manhole. Required full trash capture inlet devices are installed within the existing offsite inlets along Stevens Creek Blvd and Alves Dr. With the project proposing to connect to some of these existing inlets along Stevens Creek Blvd and Alves Dr, there is a concern that potential onsite flooding may occur due to the blockage of these devices. The Developer shall consider reconfiguring the proposed storm drain connections to connect directly to a manhole. However, if this cannot be achieved, the Developer shall provide a letter from the Owner stating the City will not be held liable if the trash capture devices cause onsite flooding. 49. LOT MERGER Prior to final acceptance of the project, Developer shall merge the parcels created for the private street network into one lot as may be required by the Director of Public Works or shall include language in the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R) to provide for City Manager review and approval of any amendments to the CC&R. 50. STREET IMPROVEMENTS & DEDICATION Roadway dedication in fee title and street improvements along the project frontage will be required to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. Street 238 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 238 of 2882 improvements, grading and drainage plans must be completed and approved prior to Final map approval. All improvements must be completed and accepted by the City prior to Building Final Occupancy or Street Improvement Encroachment Permit acceptance whichever comes first. Additional comments will be provided and shall be incorporated prior to Final Map approval to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works or his/her designee. 51. ACCEPTANCE OF PROPERTY RIGHTS The Public Works Director, or his/her designee, shall have the authority to accept all offers of dedications, easements, quitclaims and other property rights and interests on behalf of the City. 52. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the Director of Public Works. All improvements must be completed and accepted by the City prior to Building Final Occupancy or Street Improvement Encroachment Permit acceptance whichever comes first unless otherwise approved by the Director of Public Works or his/her designee. 53. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS Developer shall provide pedestrian and bicycle related improvements (eg. walkway and bicycle racks, etc.) consistent with the Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan and the Pedestrian Transportation Plan, and as approved by the Director of Public Works. All improvements must be completed and accepted by the City prior to Building Final Occupancy or Street Improvement Encroachment Permit acceptance whichever comes first unless otherwise approved by the Director of Public Works or his/her designee. 54. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION Street lighting shall be installed and shall be as approved by the Director of Public Works. Lighting fixtures shall be positioned so as to preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to adjoining properties, and shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in which the site is located. 55. GRADING Grading shall be as approved and required by the Director of Public Works in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 239 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 239 of 2882 Certifications and 404 permits maybe required. Please contact Army Corp of Engineers and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. 56. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and satisfy any requirements from the environmental analysis. Hydrology and pre- and post-development hydraulic calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control measures are to be constructed or renovated. The storm drain system may include, but is not limited to, subsurface storage of peak stormwater flows (as needed), bioretention basins, vegetated swales, and hydrodynamic separators to reduce the amount of runoff from the site and improve water quality. The storm drain system shall be designed to detain water on-site (e.g., via buried pipes, retention systems or other approved systems and improvements) as necessary to avoid an increase of the ten percent flood water surface elevation to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. Any storm water overflows or surface sheeting should be directed away from neighboring private properties and to the public right of way as much as reasonably possible. All storm drain inlets shall be clearly marked with the words “No Dumping – Flows to Creek” using permanently affixed metal medallions or equivalent, as approved by the Environmental Programs Division. Additional comments will be provided and shall be incorporated prior to Final Map approval. 57. C.3 REQUIREMENTS C.3 regulated improvements are required for all projects creating and/or replacing 5,000 S.F. or more of impervious surface, collectively over the entire project site. The developer shall reserve a minimum of 4% of developable surface area for the placement of low impact development measures, for storm water treatment, unless an alternative storm water treatment plan, that satisfies C.3 requirements, is approved by the Director of Public Works. The developer must include the use and maintenance of site design, source control and storm water treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs), which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. A Storm Water Management Plan and a Storm Water Facilities Operation, Maintenance and Easement Agreement, and certification of ongoing operation and maintenance of treatment BMPs are each required. All storm water management plans are required to obtain certification from a City approved third party reviewer. 240 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 240 of 2882 If the Project is subject to (Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R) and Homeowners Association (HOA), CC&R must also include languages pertaining to the stormwater treatment measures. 58. SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, transportation impact fees, park dedication fees and fees for under grounding of utilities. Said agreement and fees shall be executed and paid prior to Final map approval. Fees: a. Checking & Inspection Fees: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule ($5,392 or 5% of improvement costs) b. Grading Permit: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule ($4,015 or 6% of improvement costs) c. Tract Map Fee: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule ($13,413) d. Storm Drainage Fee: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule ($4,552 per AC + $345 per unit) e. Transportation Impact Fee: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule: (single-family: $6,797 per unit; townhome: $4,215 per unit). Credit shall be applied for the existing office & retail uses (office $19.15 per sq ft, retail: $10.94 per sq ft.) f. Encroachment Permit Fee: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule ($3,601 or 5% of improvement costs) g. Park Fees: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule: $60,000 per unit ($5,880,000 based on 98 units, 24 BMR units waived) h. Storm Management Plan Fee: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule ($1,789) i. Street Tree Fee: By Developer or Per FY 23-24 fee schedule: $515 per tree j. Developer Contribution: $99,500 (Stevens Creek Blvd Class IV Separated Bike Lane frontage improvements) Bonds: a. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site Improvements b. Labor & Material Bond: 100% of Off-site Improvement c. On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified 241 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 241 of 2882 at the time of recordation of a final map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. 59. FINAL MAP A final map will be subject to City Council approval and shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits. Existing buildings must be demolished prior to recordation of the final map as building(s) cannot straddle between lot lines. 60. TRANSPORTATION The Project is subject to the payment of Transportation Impact Fees under City’s Transportation Impact Fee Program (Chapter 14.02 of the Cupertino Municipal Code). Project is also subject to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis as part of environmental reviews per Chapter 17 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. Project shall provide mitigation measure as results of the transportation analysis. 61. PARKS The residential units are subject to the Park Land Dedication (for units 50 or more) or the payment of parkland fees in-lieu of parkland dedication per Chapter 13.08 and Chapter 18.24 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. The City Council has the ultimate discretion to require parkland dedication or accept park in -lieu fees. The Below Market Rate (BMR) program manual, which was last amended by City Council on July 2, 2024 per Resolution 24-067, authorizes the waiver of park fees for BMR units. Pursuant to Resolution 24-067, parkland dedication in-lieu fees for the 24 BMR units proposed for this project are hereby waived. 62. SURVEYS A Boundary Survey and a horizontal control plan will be required for all new construction to ensure the proposed building will be set based on the boundary survey and setback requirements. 63. OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Developer shall enter into an Operations & Maintenance Agreement with the City prior to Final Map approval. The Agreement shall include the operation and maintenance for non-standard appurtenances in the public road right -of-way that may include, but is not limited to, stormwater treatment facilities, landscaping, street trees, sidewalk, pavers, and street lights. 242 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 242 of 2882 64. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN The developer must submit a traffic control plan by a Registered Traffic Engineer to be approved by the City. The plan shall include a temporary traffic control plan for work in the right of way as well as a routing plan for all vehicles used during construction. All traffic control signs must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of work. The City has adopted Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards for all signage and striping work throughout the City. 65. WORK SCHEDULE After building permit issuance, the developer shall submit a work schedule every six months to the City to show the timetable for all grading/erosion control work in conjunction with this project. 66. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES Developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility devices to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works or his/her designee. Developer shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the Director of Public Works. 67. TRANSFORMERS & CABINETS Electrical transformers, telephone cabinets and similar equipment shall be placed in underground vaults, or as required by PG&E. The developer must receive written approval from both the Public Works Department and the Community Development Department prior to installation of any above ground equipment. Should above ground equipment be permitted by the City, equipment and enclosures shall not encroach into the public right-of-way and shall be screened with fencing and landscaping such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas, as determined by the Community Development Department. Transformers shall not be located in the front or side building setback area , unless it is the only acceptable location allowed by PG&E. 68. STREET TREES Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and shall be of a type approved by the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125. 243 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 243 of 2882 Developer shall install root barriers adjacent to the street trees along the curb and sidewalk to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 69. WATER BACKFLOW PREVENTERS Domestic and Fire Water Backflow preventers and similar above ground equipment shall be placed away from the public right of way and site driveways to a location approved by the Cupertino Planning Department, Santa Clara County Fire Department and the water company. 70. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City. 71. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Santa Clara County Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. Clearance should include written approval of the location of any proposed Fire Backflow Preventers, Fire Department Connections and Fire Hydrants (typically Backflow Preventers should be located on private property adjacent to the public right of way, and fire department connections must be located within 100’ of a Fire Hydrant). 72. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department as needed. 73. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading and street improvement plans. 74. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT When and where it is required by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the developer must obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) from the SWRCB, which encompasses preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), use of construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control storm water runoff quality, and BMP inspection and maintenance. 75. EROSION CONTROL PLAN Developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans. 244 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 244 of 2882 76. STORM DRAIN SYSTEM POLLUTANT CONTROLS Please identify all exterior storm drain inlets, including bioretention area overflow catch basins and linear trench drains, in the Final Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP). Full trash capture systems are required to prevent litter from entering the City’s storm drain system and/or any adjacent creeks or diversion channels. Systems and devices must be approved by the California State Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and selected from the San Francisco Bay RWQCB Certified Full Capture System List. The systems must be installed and maintained (cleaned) in accordance with the SWMP, manufacturer specifications, and provisions of the San Franscisco Bay RWQCB NPDES permit. The property owner must provide official written record of cleaning and maintenan ce to the City upon request. 77. DRAIN INLET MARKERS All exterior storm drain inlets on the parcel must be clearly marked with “No Dumping Flows to Creek” or “No Dumping Flows to Bay”. An example of drain inlet markers may be viewed at the following: www.cupertino.org/greendev 78. FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM OR WATER LINE FLUSHING If fire suppression system or water line flushing will be conducted as part of the scope of permitted work, complete and submit the Planned Water Discharge Form (www.cupertino.org/greendev) to the Environmental Programs Division several business days in advance of the scheduled discharge. 79. PCB (POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYLS) MANAGEMENT AND MITIGATION At the time of building permit application, PCB and remediation is required prior to obtaining a demolition permit. Structures built or remodeled between January 1, 1940 and December 31, 1980 must be tested for PCB presence. All demolition permit applicants, including residential, must complete the PCB Screening Assessment Form to determine if the structure being demolished is deemed an applicable structure. Additional information concerning PCB screening requirements may be viewed at www.cupertino.org/greendev. Additional information concerning assessment and testing requirements, qualified consultants to perform sampling, testing, and reporting may be viewed at https://scvurppp.org/pcbs-demo-permit/. No demolition permit will be issued until all required PCB documents have been accurately completed, submitted to, and approved by the Environmental Programs division of the Public Works Department. 245 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 245 of 2882 80. CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS RECYCLING AND RECOVERY At the time of building permit application, a completed construction and demolition (C&D) Debris Recovery Plan (DRP) must be submitted. All debris disposal and recycling from the construction project must be tracked throughout the duration of the project. Project applicants and contractors must use Green Halo (Cupertino.wastetracking.com) to create their Plan and to submit all construction waste generation tonnage information. A hold on issuance of the building permit will be placed until the Plan is submitted and approved. A hold will be placed on the final inspection until all waste tonnage information for the project has been entered into Green Halo and approved by the Environmental Programs Division. 81. CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COMPANY CLEARANCE Provide California Water Service Company approval for water connection, service capability and location and layout of water lines and backflow preventers prior to Final Map approval. 82. DEDICATION OF UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS Developer shall “quit claim” to the City all rights to pump, take or otherwise extract water from the underground basin or any underground strata in the Santa Clara Valley. 83. SANITARY DISTRICT A letter of clearance or sign off of street improvement plans for the project shall be obtained from the Cupertino Sanitary District prior to Final Map approval. 84. UTILITY EASEMENTS Clearance approvals from the agencies with easements on the property (including PG&E, AT&T, and California Water Company, and/or equivalent agencies) will be required prior to Final Map approval. SECTION V: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE SCC FIRE DEPT. Except for otherwise noted, the following conditions must be completed and/or submitted prior to Final Map recordation. 85. GROUND LADDER / EMERGENCY RESCUE OPENINGS Ground-ladder rescue from second and third floor rooms shall be made possible for fire department operations. Climbing angle of seventy -five degrees shall be demonstrated on the plans and maintained. [CFC Sec. 503 and 1031 NFPA 1932 Sec. 5.1.8 through 5.1.9.2] a. Plans to show ground ladder landing areas in relation to proposed landscaping. 246 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 246 of 2882 b. Landscaping plans to show the location of all emergency rescue openings / ground ladder landing locations. These areas shall remain unobstructed at ground level and not have any trees overhead. c. Identify which plan sheets have been updated to demonstrate conforming landscaping and ground ladder access. 86. AERIAL ACCESS Where the vertical distance between the grade plane and the highest roof surface exceeds 30 feet (9144 mm), approved aerial fire apparatus access roads shall be provided. For purposes of this section, the highest roof surface shall be determined by measurement to the eave of a pitched roof, the intersection of the roof to the exterior wall, or the top of parapet walls, whichever is greater. [CFC Sect. D105] a. AMMR approved for aerial, including installation of fire alarm system interconnected throughout the whole building with mini horn on roof and an “enhanced” 13D fire sprinkler system. 87. FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS The minimum clear width of fire department access roads shall be 20 feet for access roadways and 26 feet where aerial access is required. For installation guide lines refer to Fire Department Standard Details and Specifications sheet A-1. [CFC Sec. 503] - Reference sheet C23. 88. SECONDARY FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS ROAD Developments of one or two family dwellings where the number of dwelling units exceeds 30 shall be provided with two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads and shall meet the requirements of the SCCFD A-1 standard. 89. FIRE LANES Fire apparatus access roads shall be designated and marked as a fire lane as set forth in Section 22500.1 of the California Vehicle Code. The entire 20 foot fire apparatus access roads shall be marked as fire lanes. Signs or other approved notices shall be posted. - Reference sheet C23. 90. PARKING When parking is permitted on streets, both during & after construction, it shall conform to the following: a. Parking is permitted on both sides of the street with street widths of 36 feet or more b. Parking is permitted on one side of the street with street widths of 28 – 35 feet 247 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 247 of 2882 c. No parking is permitted when street widths are less than 28 feet NOTE: Fire lane and turnaround striping shall be provided and verified by site inspection. [SCCFD, A-1 Standard]. 91. FIRE HYDRANT(S) Fire hydrants shall be provided along required fire apparatus access roads and adjacent public streets and shall be within 400 feet of the structure (CFC Sec. 507 App. B and App. C). a. Hydrant locations shown on sheet C23. Hydrants shall be installed prior to combustible construction material being brought onsite. Coordinate with CalWater for hydrant installation. 92. FIRE FLOW The fire flow for this project is 3,000 GPM at 20 psi residual pressure for 3 hours with an automatic fire sprinkler system installed. [CFC Sec. B105] Note: The minimum required number and spacing of the hydrants shall be in accordance with CFC Table C102.1. Any alternative to this standard must be determined to be to the satisfaction of the Santa Clara County Fire Department prior to building permit issuance. 93. TIMING OF INSTALLATION Fire apparatus access roads & water supply for fire protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except when approved alternative methods of protection are provided. Temporary street signs shall be installed at each street intersection when construction of new roadways allows passage by vehicles in accordance with Section 505.2. 94. ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION New and existing buildings shall have approved address umbers, building numbers or approved building identification placed in a position that is plainly legible and visible from the street or road fronting the property. These numbers shall contrast with their background. Address numbers shall be Arabic numbers or alphabetical letters. Numbers shall be a minimum of 6 inches (101.6 mm) high with a minimum stroke width of 0.5 inch (12.7 mm). Address numbers shall be maintained. [CFC Sec. 505.1] 95. CONSTRUCTION SITE SAFETY All construction sites must comply with applicable provisions of the CFC Chapter 33 and our Standard Detail and Specification S1 -7. Provide appropriate notations on subsequent plan submittals, as appropriate to the project. [CFC Chp. 33] 248 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 248 of 2882 96. THIS PROJECT SHALL COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING The California Fire (CFC), Building (CBC) Codes, 2022 edition, as adopted by the City of Cupertino, California Code of Regulations (CCR) and Health & Safety Code, and Santa Clara County Fire Department Standards (SCCFD). SECTION VI: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE CUPERTINO SANITARY DISTRICT 97. INSTALLERS AGREEMENT The property owner shall enter into an Installer’s Agreement with the District for the construction of the proposed sewer infrastructure prior to issuance of Building Permits. 98. PAYMENT OF FEES The property owner shall pay all required New Lateral, Sewer Development, Treatment Plant Capacity, plan check, and permit fees to the District prior to issuance of Building Permits. 99. UTILITY PLANS Provide utility plan and profile sheets during the Building Permit phase. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of April, 2026, by the following vote: Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: ________ Kitty Moore, Mayor City of Cupertino ________________________ Date ATTEST: ________________________ Lauren Sapudar, City Clerk ________________________ Date 249 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 249 of 2882 RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A VESTING TENTATIVE MAP FOR A NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CONSISTING OF 56-TOWNHOME-CONDOMINIUM UNITS AND 66 SMALL LOT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, ON FOUR CONTIGUOUS PARCELS, TOTALING 6.93-ACRES LOCATED AT 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 STEVENS CREEK BLVD; APNs: 326-32-050, -051, -052, & -053 SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: TM-2024-006 Applicant: Kevin Choy (Harvest Properties) Property Owner: Blair Volckmann Location: 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd; APNs: 326-32-050, -051, -052, and -053 SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR A TENTATIVE MAP: WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Tentative Map as described in Section I of this resolution; and WHEREAS, the project is determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines because the proposed project would meet the requirements of the Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.66(a); and WHEREAS, on March 24, 2026, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to receive staff’s presentation and public testimony, and to consider the information contained in the Exemption Memorandum along with all staff reports, other pertinent documents, and all written and oral statements received prior to and at the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on March 24, 2026 the Planning Commission recommended on a 5-0 vote that the City Council approve the Use Permit (U-2024-008) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-11), approve the Architectural and Site Approval Permit (ASA-2024-011) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-12), approve the Vesting Tentative Map (TM-2024-006) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-13), and approve the Tree Removal Permit (TR-2024-033), in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-14); and 250 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 250 of 2882 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission motion included a recommendation to City Council to explore additional benefits or assistance options for retail tenants that will be displaced due to this housing development and similar projects. The Planning Commission requested that the City Council, as a matter of establishing policy, consider items such as expedited permitting processes, consideration of reduced fees, and other opportunities for assistance for businesses impacted by seeking relocation; and WHEREAS, all necessary public notices having been given as required by the City of Cupertino Municipal Code and the Government Code, and the Planning Commission held at least one public hearing in regard to this application; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino is the decision -making body for this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support the application for a Tentative Map; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds as follows with regard to this application : a. That the proposed subdivision map is consistent with the City of Cupertino General Plan. The subject property is consistent with the General Plan since the property is permitted to have up to 25 dwelling units an acre pursuant to the vesting provisions of SB330 which vested the development standards to those that were in place in April 2024. b. That the design and improvements of the proposed subdivision are consistent with the General Plan. The off-site improvements are consistent with the City’s General Plan and Heart of the City Specific Plan policies related to applicable pedestrian and bicycle safety , with improvements made in accordance with the right-of-way design and the urban canopy within the public right-of-way. While the development is required to have a 35 -foot setback from the street-facing side of the curb, state density bonus law requires the City to waive local development standards to accommodate a project as designed, and still consider the design consistent with the General Plan and Specific Plan . c. That the site is physically suitable for the type of development contemplated under the approved subdivision. The proposed tentative map is compatible with the adjoining land uses and no physical constraints are present that would conflict with the anticipated land use and development. Moreover, there are no topographical anomalies that differentiate this property from adjacent properties and the site is located on the valley floor and is not listed within any environmentally sensitive zone. 251 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 251 of 2882 d. That the site is physically suitable for the intensity of development contemplated under the approved subdivision. The subject property is physically suitable in size and shape and in conformance to development standards and is configured to accommodate a multi-unit development like the one proposed. e. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish and wildlife or their habitat. The design of the subdivision and proposed improvements will not injure fish and wildlife or their habitat because the property is a previously developed site, with no fish and wildlife habitat in the vicinity; the site is located in an urbanized area where residential land use is allowed. f. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements associated therewith are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The proposed subdivision design and improvements will not cause serious public health problems. The project has access to sewer connections, water services and electric services. The proposed development is consistent with the intent of the policies of the General Plan for a development of this density on this site, and the on -site and off-site improvements improve neighborhood walkability through improved parkway and sidewalk construction with size-appropriate driveway curb-cuts and street and private tree planting. g. That the design of the subdivision and its associated improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. No easement or right-of-way exists currently that would be impeded or conflict with the proposed subdivision. New public access easements will be required to address General Plan Mobility Element Policies M-2.5 and M-3.2, and Land Use Element Strategy LU- 13.7.3, as identified on the approved map. These easements shall be maintained to allow for public access through the property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on PAGE 4 thereof, and those contained in all other Resolutions approved for this Project. The application for a Vesting Tentative Map, Application No. TM-2024-006, is hereby approved, and that the sub-conclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified 252 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 252 of 2882 in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application No. TM-2024-006 as set forth in the Minutes of the City Council Meeting of April 7, 2026 meeting, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS Approval is based on the plan set entitled “20807 – 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd. Cupertino” consisting of 196 sheets labeled as, A0.01– A4.00, C1 – C26, L1.0 – L10.1, JT-1 to JT-4, PM, and SL-1 to SL-4, drawn by ktgy Architects, Gates + Associates landscape, cbg Civil Engineers Surveyors, and Radius Joint Trench, except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution. 2. ACCURACY OF PROJECT PLANS The applicant/property owner is responsible to verify all pertinent property data including but not limited to property boundary locations, building setbacks, property size, building square footage, any relevant easements and/or construction records. Any misrepresentation of any property data may invalidate this approval and may require additional review. 3. CONCURRENT APPROVAL CONDITIONS The conditions of approval contained in file nos. U-2024-008, ASA-2024-011, and TR-2024-033 shall be applicable to this approval. 4. ANNOTATION OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The conditions of approval set forth shall be incorporated into and annotated on the first page of the building plans. 5. PUBLIC ACCESS REQUIREMENTS In accordance with Mobility Element Policies M-2.5 and M-3.2 of the 2015-2040 Cupertino General Plan in effect in January 2024, the applicant shall maintain public access to the privately maintained streets and walkways where public access easements are shown on the Vesting Tentative Map. 6. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS The applicant is responsible to consult with other departments and/or agencies with regard to the proposed project for additional conditions and requirements. Any misrepresentation of any submitted data may invalidate an approval by the Community Development Department. 253 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 253 of 2882 7. INDEMNIFICATION As part of the application, to the fullest extent permitted by law, the applicant shall agree to indemnify, defend with the attorneys of the City’s choice, and hold harmless the City, its City Council, and its officers, employees, and agents (collectively, the “indemnified parties”) from and against any liability, claim, action, cause of action, suit, damages, judgment, lien, levy, or proceeding (collectively referred to as “proceeding”) brought by a third party against one or more of the indemnified parties or one or more of the indemnified parties and the applicant related to any Ordinance, Resolution, or action approving the project, the related entitlements, environmental review documents, finding or determinations, or any other permit or approval authorized for the project. The indemnification shall include but not be limited to damages, fees, and costs awarded against the City, if any, and cost of suit, attorneys’ fees, and other costs, liabilities, and expenses incurred in connection with such proceedi ng whether incurred by the Applicant, the City, or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. The applicant shall agree to (without limitation) reimburse the City its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. Such attorneys’ fees and costs shall include amounts paid to the City’s outside counsel and shall include City Attorney time and overhead costs and other City staff overhead costs and any costs directly related to the litigation reasonably incurred by City. The applicant shall likewise agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the indemnified parties from and against any damages, attorneys’ fees, or costs awards, including attorneys’ fees awarded under Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5, assessed or awarded against the indemnified parties. The Applicant shall cooperate with the City to enter a Reimbursement Agreement to govern any such reimbursement. The Applicant shall agree to (without limitation) reimburse the City for all costs incurred in additional investigation or study of, or for supplementing, redrafting, revising, or amending, any document (such as an Environmental Impact Report, negative declaration, specific plan, or general plan amendment) if made necessary by proceedings challenging the project approvals and related environmental review, if the applicant desires to continue to pursue the project. The Applicant shall agree that the City shall have no liability to the Applicant for business interruption, punitive, speculative, or consequential damages. 8. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS, OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant 254 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 254 of 2882 to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. SECTION IV: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. Except for otherwise noted, the following conditions must be completed and/or submitted prior to Final Map recordation. 9. OFFSITE STORM DRAIN CONNECTIONS The City requires new development projects to connect to the City storm drain system via a manhole. Required full trash capture inlet devices are installed within the existing offsite inlets along Stevens Creek Blvd and Alves Dr. With the project proposing to connect to some of these existing inlets along Stevens Creek Blvd and Alves Dr, there is a concern that potential onsite flooding may occur due to the blockage of these devices. The Developer shall consider reconfiguring the proposed storm drain connections to connect directly to a manhole. However, if this cannot be achieved, the Developer shall provide a letter from the Owner stating the City will not be held liable if the trash capture devices cause onsite flooding. 10. LOT MERGER Prior to final acceptance of the project, Developer shall merge the parcels created for the private street network into one lot as may be required by the Director of Public Works or shall include language in the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R) to provide for City Manager review and approval of any amendments to the CC&R. 11. STREET IMPROVEMENTS & DEDICATION Roadway dedication in fee title and street improvements along the project frontage will be required to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. Street improvements, grading and drainage plans must be completed and approved prior to Final map approval. Street improvements may include, but not be limited to, new detached sidewalk, driveways, curb and gutter, utility connections, and street tree installations. All improvements must be completed and accepted by the City prior to Building Final 255 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 255 of 2882 Occupancy or Street Improvement Encroachment Permit acceptance whichever comes first. Additional comments will be provided and shall be incorporated prior to Final Map approval to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works or his/her designee. 12. ACCEPTANCE OF PROPERTY RIGHTS The Public Works Director, or his/her designee, shall have the authority to accept all offers of dedications, easements, quitclaims and other property rights and interests on behalf of the City. 13. CURB AND GUTTER IMPROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks and related structures shall be installed in accordance with grades and standards as specified by the Director of Public Works. All improvements must be completed and accepted by the City prior to Building Final Occupancy or Street Improvement Encroachment Permit acceptance whichever comes first unless otherwise approved by the Director of Public Works or his/her designee. 14. PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE IMPROVEMENTS Developer shall provide pedestrian and bicycle related improvements (eg. walkway and bicycle racks, etc.) consistent with the Cupertino Bicycle Transportation Plan and the Pedestrian Transportation Plan, and as approved by the Director of Public Works. All improvements must be completed and accepted by the City prior to Building Final Occupancy or Street Improvement Encroachment Permit acceptance whichever comes first unless otherwise approved by the Director of Public Works or his/her designee. 15. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION Street lighting shall be installed and shall be as approved by the Director of Public Works. Lighting fixtures shall be positioned so as to preclude glare and other forms of visual interference to adjoining properties, and shall be no higher than the maximum height permitted by the zone in which the site is located. 16. GRADING Grading shall be as approved and required by the Director of Public Works in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. 401 Certifications and 404 permits maybe required. Please contact Army Corp of Engineers and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. 256 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 256 of 2882 17. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and satisfy any requirements from the environmental analysis. Hydrology and pre- and post-development hydraulic calculations must be provided to indicate whether additional storm water control measures are to be constructed or renovated. The storm drain system may include, but is not limited to, subsurface storage of peak stormwater flows (as needed), bioretention basins, vegetated swales, and hydrodynamic separators to reduce the amount of runoff from the site and improve water quality. The storm drain system shall be designed to detain water on-site (e.g., via buried pipes, retention systems or other approved systems and improvements) as necessary to avoid an increase of the ten percent flood water surface elevation to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. Any storm water overflows or surface sheeting should be directed away from neighboring private properties and to the public right of way as much as reasonably possible. All storm drain inlets shall be clearly marked with the words “No Dumping – Flows to Creek” using permanently affixed metal medallions or equivalent, as approved by the Environmental Programs Division. Additional comments will be provided and shall be incorporated prior to Final Map approval. 18. C.3 REQUIREMENTS C.3 regulated improvements are required for all projects creating and/or replacing 5,000 S.F. or more of impervious surface, collectively over the entire project site. The developer shall reserve a minimum of 4% of developable surface area for the placement of low impact development measures, for storm water treatment, unless an alternative storm water treatment plan, that satisfies C.3 requirements, is approved by the Director of Public Works. The developer must include the use and maintenance of site design, source control and storm water treatment Best Management Practices (BMPs), which must be designed per approved numeric sizing criteria. A Storm Water Management Plan and a Storm Water Facilities Operation, Maintenance and Easement Agreement, and certification of ongoing operation and maintenance of treatment BMPs are each required. All storm water management plans are required to obtain certification from a City approved third party reviewer. 257 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 257 of 2882 If the Project is subject to (Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R) and Homeowners Association (HOA), CC&R must also include languages pertaining to the stormwater treatment measures. 19. SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The project developer shall enter into a Subdivision Improvement Agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storm drain fees, transportation impact fees, park dedication fees and fees for under grounding of utilities. Said agreement and fees shall be executed and paid prior to Final map approval. Fees: a. Checking & Inspection Fees: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule ($5,392 or 5% of improvement costs) b. Grading Permit: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule ($4,015 or 6% of improvement costs) c. Tract Map Fee: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule ($13,413) d. Storm Drainage Fee: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule ($4,552 per AC + $345 per unit) e. Transportation Impact Fee: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule: (single-family: $6,797 per unit; townhome: $4,215 per unit). Credit shall be applied for the existing office & retail uses (office $19.15 per sq ft, retail: $10.94 per sq ft.) f. Encroachment Permit Fee: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule ($3,601 or 5% of improvement costs) g. Park Fees: Per FY 23-24 fee schedule: $60,000 per unit ($5,880,000 based on 98 units, 24 BMR units waived) h. Storm Management Plan Fee Per FY 23-24 fee schedule ($1,789) i. Street Tree Fee: By Developer or Per FY 23-24 fee schedule: $515 per tree j. Developer Contribution: $99,500 (Stevens Creek Blvd Class IV Separated Bike Lane frontage improvements) Bonds: a. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site Improvements b. Labor & Material Bond: 100% of Off-site Improvement c. On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. 258 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 258 of 2882 The fees described above are imposed based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a final map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, the fees changed at that time will reflect the then current fee schedule. 20. FINAL MAP A final map will be subject to City Council approval and shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits. Existing buildings must be demolished prior to recordation of the final map as building(s) cannot straddle between lot lines. 21. TRANSPORTATION The Project is subject to the payment of Transportation Impact Fees under City’s Transportation Impact Fee Program (Chapter 14.02 of the Cupertino Municipal Code). Project is also subject to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis as part of environmental reviews per Chapter 17 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. Project shall provide mitigation measure as results of the transportation analysis. 22. PARKS The residential units are subject to the Park Land Dedication (for units 50 or more) or the payment of parkland fees in-lieu of parkland dedication per Chapter 13.08 and Chapter 18.24 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. The City Council has the ultimate discretion to require parkland dedication or accept park in -lieu fees. The Below Market Rate (BMR) program manual, which was last amended by City Council on July 2, 2024 per Resolution 24-067, authorizes the waiver of park fees for BMR units. Pursuant to Resolution 24-067, parkland dedication in-lieu fees for the 24 BMR units proposed for this project are hereby waived. 23. SURVEYS A Boundary Survey and a horizontal control plan will be required for all new construction to ensure the proposed building will be set based on the boundary survey and setback requirements. 24. OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT Developer shall enter into an Operations & Maintenance Agreement with the City prior to Final Map approval. The Agreement shall include the operation and maintenance for non-standard appurtenances in the public road right -of-way that may include, but is not limited to, stormwater treatment facilities, landscaping, street trees, sidewalk, pavers, and street lights. 259 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 259 of 2882 25. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES Developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility devices to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works or his/her designee. Developer shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of the affected Utility provider and the Director of Public Works. 26. TRANSFORMERS & CABINETS Electrical transformers, telephone cabinets and similar equipment shall be placed in underground vaults, or as required by PG&E. The developer must receive written approval from both the Public Works Department and the Community Development Department prior to installation of any above ground equipment. Should above ground equipment be permitted by the City, equipment and enclosures shall not encroach into the public right-of-way and shall be screened with fencing and landscaping such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas, as determined by the Community Development Department. Transformers shall not be located in the front or side building setback area unless it is the only acceptable location allowed by PG&E. 27. WATER BACKFLOW PREVENTERS Domestic and Fire Water Backflow preventers and similar above ground equipment shall be placed away from the public right of way and site driveways to a location approved by the Cupertino Planning Department, Santa Clara County Fire Department and the water company. 28. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (BMPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control Board, for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP plans shall be included in grading and street improvement plans. 29. NPDES CONSTRUCTION GENERAL PERMIT When and where it is required by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the developer must obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) from the SWRCB, which encompasses preparation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), use of construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) to control storm water runoff quality, and BMP inspection and maintenance. 260 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 260 of 2882 30. EROSION CONTROL PLAN Developer must provide an approved erosion control plan by a Registered Civil Engineer. This plan should include all erosion control measures used to retain materials on site. Erosion control notes shall be stated on the plans. 31. WORK SCHEDULE After building permit issuance, the developer shall submit a work schedule every six months to the City to show the timetable for all grading/erosion control work in conjunction with this project. 32. TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN The developer must submit a traffic control plan by a Registered Traffic Engineer to be approved by the City. The plan shall include a temporary traffic control plan for work in the right of way as well as a routing plan for all vehicles used during construction. All traffic control signs must be reviewed and approved by the City prior to commencement of work. The City has adopted Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards for all signage and striping work throughout the City. 33. STREET TREES Street trees shall be planted within the Public Right of Way to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and shall be of a type approved by the City in accordance with Ordinance No. 125. Developer shall install root barriers adjacent to the street trees along the curb and sidewalk to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 34. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City. 35. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT A letter of clearance for the project shall be obtained from the Santa Clara County Fire Department prior to issuance of building permits. Clearance should include written approval of the location of any proposed Fire Backflow Preventers, Fire Department Connections and Fire Hydrants (typically Backflow Preventers should be located on private property adjacent to the public right of way, and fire department connections must be located within 100’ of a Fire Hydrant). 36. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City and Santa Clara County Fire Department as needed. 261 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 261 of 2882 37. CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COMPANY CLEARANCE Provide California Water Service Company approval for water connection, service capability and location and layout of water lines and backflow preventers prior to Final Map approval. 38. DEDICATION OF UNDERGROUND WATER RIGHTS Developer shall “quit claim” to the City all rights to pump, take or otherwise extract water from the underground basin or any underground strata in the Santa Clara Valley. 39. SANITARY DISTRICT A letter of clearance or sign off of street improvement plans for the project shall be obtained from the Cupertino Sanitary District prior to Final Map approval. 40. UTILITY EASEMENTS Clearance approvals from the agencies with easements on the property (including PG&E, AT&T, and California Water Company, and/or equivalent agencies) will be required prior to Final Map approval. 41. STORM DRAIN SYSTEM POLLUTANT CONTROLS Please identify all exterior storm drain inlets, including bioretention area overflow catch basins and linear trench drains, in the Final Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP). Full trash capture systems are required to prevent litter from entering the City’s storm drain system and/or any adjacent creeks or diversion channels. Systems and devices must be approved by the California State Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and selected from the San Francisco Bay RWQCB Certified Full Capture System List. The systems must be installed and maintained (cleaned) in accordance with the SWMP, manufacturer specifications, and provisions of the San Franscisco Bay RWQCB NPDES permit. The property owner must provide official written record of cleaning and maintenance to the City upon request. 42. DRAIN INLET MARKERS All exterior storm drain inlets on the parcel must be clearly marked with “No Dumping Flows to Creek” or “No Dumping Flows to Bay”. An example of drain inlet markers may be viewed at the following: www.cupertino.org/greendev 43. PCB (POLYCHLORINATED BIPH ENYLS) MANAGEMENT AND MITIGATION At the time of building permit application, PCB and remediation is required prior to obtaining a demolition permit. Structures built or remodeled between January 1, 1940 and December 31, 1980 must be tested for PCB presence. All demolition 262 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 262 of 2882 permit applicants, including residential, must complete the PCB Screening Assessment Form to determine if the structure being demolished is deemed an applicable structure. Additional information concerning PCB screening requirements may be viewed at www.cupertino.org/greendev . Additional information concerning assessment and testing requirements, qualified consultants to perform sampling, testing, and reporting may be viewed at https://scvurppp.org/pcbs-demo-permit/ . No demolition permit will be issued until all required PCB documents have been accurately completed, submitted to, and approved by the Environmental Programs division of the Public Works Department. 44. CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS RECYCLING AND RECOVERY At the time of building permit application, a completed construction and demolition (C&D) Debris Recovery Plan (DRP) must be submitted. All debris disposal and recycling from the construction project must be tracked throughout the duration of the project. Project applicants and contractors must use Green Halo (Cupertino.wastetracking.com) to create their Plan and to submit all construction waste generation tonnage information. A hold on issuance of the building permit will be placed until the Plan is submitted and approved. A hold will be placed on the final inspection until all waste tonnage information for the project has been entered into Green Halo and approved by the Environmental Programs Division. 45. FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM OR WATER LINE FLUSHING If fire suppression system or water line flushing will be conducted as part of the scope of permitted work, complete and submit the Planned Water Discharge Form (www.cupertino.org/greendev) to the Environmental Programs Division several business days in advance of the scheduled discharge. SECTION V: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE CUPERTINO SANITARY DISTRICT 46. INSTALLERS AGREEMENT The property owner shall enter into an Installer’s Agreement with the District for the construction of the proposed sewer infrastructure prior to issuance of Building Permits. 47. PAYMENT OF FEES The property owner shall pay all required New Lateral, Sewer Development, Treatment Plant Capacity, plan check, and permit fees to the District prior to issuance of Building Permits. 263 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 263 of 2882 48. UTILITY PLANS Provide utility plan and profile sheets during the Building Permit phase. CITY ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF ENGINEERING/SURVEYING CONDITIONS (Section 66474.18 California Government Code) I hereby certify that the engineering and surveying conditions specified in Section IV. of this Resolution conform to generally accepted engineering practices. ___________________________ Chad Mosley, Assistant Director of Public Works City Engineer CA License 66077 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of April, 2026, by the following vote: Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: ________ Kitty Moore, Mayor City of Cupertino ________________________ Date ATTEST: ________________________ Lauren Sapudar, City Clerk ________________________ Date 264 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 264 of 2882 RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR THE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF 249 DEVELOPMENT TREES IN COMBINATION OF IN-LIEU FEE LOCATED AT 20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 STEVENS CREEK BLVD; APNs: 326-32-050, -051, -052, & -053) SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.:TR-2024-033 Applicant:Kevin Choy (Harvest Properties) Property Owner:Blair Volckmann Location:20807, 20813, 20823 & 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd; APNs: 326-32-050, -051, -052, and -053 SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR A TREE REMOVAL PERMIT: WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Tree Removal Permit as described in Section I of this resolution; and WHEREAS, the project is determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(1) of the CEQA Guidelines because the proposed project would meet the requirements of the Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.66(a); and WHEREAS, on March 24, 2026 , the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to receive staff’s presentation and public testimony, and to consider the information contained in the Exemption Memorandum along with all staff reports, other pertinent documents, and all written and oral statements received prior to and at the public hearing; and WHEREAS, on March 24, 2026 the Planning Commission recommended on a 5-0 vote that the City Council approve the Use Permit (U-2024-008) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-11), approve the Architectural and Site Approval Permit (ASA-2024-011) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-12), approve the Vesting Tentative Map (TM-2024-006) in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-13), and approve the Tree Removal Permit (TR-2024-033), in substantially similar form to the Resolution presented (Resolution No. 2026-14); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission motion included a recommendation to City Council to explore additional benefits or assistance options for retail tenants that will be displaced due to this housing development and similar projects. The Planning 265 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 265 of 2882 Commission requested that the City Council, as a matter of establishing policy, consider items such as expedited permitting processes, consideration of reduced fees, and other opportunities for assistance for businesses impacted by seeking relocation; and WHEREAS, all necessary public notices having been given as required by the City of Cupertino Municipal Code and the Government Code, and the Planning Commission held at least one public hearing in regard to this application; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cupertino is the decision -making body for this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support the application for a Tree Removal Permit; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds as follows with regard to this application : a) That the location of the trees restricts the economic enjoyment of the property by severely limiting the use of property in a manner not typically experienced by owners of similarly zoned and situated property, and the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the approval authority that there are no reasonable alternatives to preserve the tree(s). To accommodate for the new development’s structures, walkways and internal street network to public open spaces, the existing trees cannot be preserved in their locations. The applicant proposes a combination of replacement trees throughout the site with payment of an in-lieu of tree replacement fee, in conformance with the Municipal Code Ordinance requirements. The project proposes to locate the replacement trees where tree coverage is needed, while protecting all off site trees adjacent to the project site. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution, beginning on PAGE 3 herein, and subject to the conditions contained in all other Resolutions approved for this Project The application for a Tree Removal Permit, Application No. TR -2024-033, is hereby approved, and that the sub-conclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based are contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application no. TR-2024-033 as set forth in the Minutes of the City Council Meeting of April 7, 2026 Meeting, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. 266 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 266 of 2882 SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1.APPROVED EXHIBITS Approval is based on the plan set entitled “20807 – 20883 Stevens Creek Blvd. Cupertino” consisting of 196 sheets labeled as, A0.01– A4.00, C1 – C26, L1.0 – L10.1, JT-1 to JT-4, PM, and SL-1 to SL-4, drawn by ktgy Architects, Gates + Associates landscape, cbg Civil Engineers Surveyors, and Radius Joint Trench, except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution. 2.ACCURACY OF PROJECT PLANS The applicant/property owner is responsible for verifying all pertinent property data including but not limited to property boundary locations, building setbacks, property size, building square footage, any relevant easements and/or construction records. Any misrepresentation of any property data may invalidate this approval and may require additional review. 3.CONCURRENT APPROVAL CONDITIONS The conditions of approval contained in file nos. TM-2024-006, ASA-2024-011, and U-2024-008 shall be applicable to this approval. 4.ANNOTATION OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The conditions of approval set forth shall be incorporated into and annotated on the first page of the building plans. 5.TREE RETENTION In accordance with the approved, peer-reviewed arborist report for this project, the applicant is required to protect in-place and retain the (6) Callery Pear street trees along Steven’s Creek Blvd #2, #5, #7, #8, #10, & #233; and protect in place neighboring trees located off-site along the shared west property line #250-#258. 6.TREE REPLACEMENT SIZE The applicant shall provide adequate tree replacements for trees proposed to be removed in conformance with the replacement guidelines per Cupertino Municipal Code Section 14.18.160. The required tree replacement for the project is eight (8) 36” box trees or 143 24” box trees, or a combination thereof that meets the minimum requirements. If the planting schedule is modified, the size of the proposed replacement trees shall be consistent with the following requirements of the City’s Protected Tree Ordinance unless deemed infeasible by the City’s Consulting Arborist: 267 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 267 of 2882 • Diameter of trunk size of removed tree up to 12 inches shall be replaced with one 24-inch box tree; • Over 12 inches and up to 36 inches shall be replaced by two 24-inch box tree or one 36-inch box tree; and • Over 36 inches shall be replaced with one 36-inch box tree. Should it be determined that planting of replacement trees in the quantity or a portion of the quantity specified above cannot be accomplished in accordance with best forestry management practices, the applicant shall pay an in -lieu fee for each tree not replaced on-site in accordance with the in-lieu fee requirements outlined in Municipal Code Section 14.18.160(B). 7. ARBORIST REVIEW Prior to building permit issuance, any modifications to the approved landscape plan including, but not limited to, the number, location, and species of replacement trees, shall be reviewed and approved by the City in consultation with the City’s Consulting Arborist, at the applicant’s cost. All replacement trees shall be planted prior to final building inspection. The Applicant shall provide the Department of Community Development adequate documentation, including, but not limited to, photographs, receipts or invoices, to verify that replacement trees have been planted. The City’s consulting arborist shall inspect the trees after planting and a report ascertaining the good health of the trees mentioned above shall be provided prior to issuance of final occupancy for any of the residential units. 8. TREE PROTECTION a. As part of the demolition or building permit drawings, a tree protection plan shall be prepared by a certified arborist for the trees to be retained. In addition, the following measures shall be added, at a minimum, to the protection plan: • For trees to be retained, chain link fencing and other root protection shall be installed around the dripline of the tree prior to any project site work. • No parking or vehicle traffic shall be allowed under root zones, unless using buffers approved by the Project Arborist. • No trenching within the critical root zone area is allowed. If trenching is needed in the vicinity of trees to be retained, the City’s consulting arborist shall be consulted before any trenching or root cutting beneath the dripline of the tree. • Wood chip mulch shall be evenly spread inside the tree projection fence to a four-inch depth. 268 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 268 of 2882 • Tree protection conditions shall be posted on the required tree protection barriers. • Retained trees shall be watered to maintain them in good health. • A covenant on the property shall be recorded that identifies all the protected trees, prior to final occupancy. b. The tree protection measures shall be inspected and approved by the certified arborist prior to issuance of building permits. c. The City’s consulting arborist, retained at the applicant’s expense, shall inspect the trees to be retained and the tree protection measures, and shall provide reviews prior to issuance of demolition, grading or building permits. d. A report ascertaining the good health of the trees mentioned above shall be provided by the applicant’s arborist, to be peer reviewed by the City’s Consulting Arborist, prior to issuance of final occupancy. 9. PROTECTED TREES The applicant and future property owners understand that the replacement trees and all other trees approved with this development may not be removed without the prior approval by the Community Development Department of a Tree Removal Permit and that they shall be responsible for ensuring the proper maintenance and care of the trees. The applicant shall also disclose the location and species of all replacement and development trees on site upon sale of the property. 10. CONSULTATION WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS The applicant is responsible for consulting with other departments and/or agencies with regard to the proposed project for additional conditions and requirements. Any misrepresentation of any submitted data may invalidate an approval by the Community Development Department. 11. INDEMNIFICATION As part of the application, to the fullest extent permitted by law, the applicant shall agree to indemnify, defend with the attorneys of the City’s choice, and hold harmless the City, its City Council, and its officers, employees, and agents (collectively, the “indemnified parties”) from and against any liability, claim, action, cause of action, suit, damages, judgment, lien, levy, or proceeding (collectively referred to as “proceeding”) brought by a third party against one or more of the indemnified parties or one or more of the indemnified parties and the applicant related to any Ordinance, Resolution, or action approving the project, the related entitlements, environmental review documents, finding or determinations, or any other permit or approval authorized for the project. The 269 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 269 of 2882 indemnification shall include but not be limited to damages, fees, and costs awarded against the City, if any, and cost of suit, attorneys’ fees, and other costs, liabilities, and expenses incurred in connection with such proceeding whether incurred by the Applicant, the City, or the parties initiating or bringing such proceeding. The applicant shall agree to (without limitation) reimburse the City its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. Such attorneys’ fees and costs shall include amounts paid to the City’s outside counsel and shall include City Attorney time and overhead costs and other City staff overhead costs and any costs directly related to the litigation reasonably incurred by City. The applicant shall likewise agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the indemnified parties from and against any damages, attorneys’ fees, or costs awards, including attorneys’ fees awarded under Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5, assessed or awarded against the indemnified parties. The Applicant shall cooperate with the City to enter a Reimbursement Agreement to govern any such reimbursement. The Applicant shall agree to (without limitation) reimburse the City for all costs incurred in additional investigation or study of, or for supplementing, redrafting, revising, or amending, any document (such as an Environmental Impact Report, negative declaration, specific plan, or general plan amendment) if made necessary by proceedings challenging the project approvals and related environmental review, if the applicant desires to continue to pursue the project. The Applicant shall agree that the City shall have no liability to the Applicant for business interruption, punitive, speculative, or consequential damages. 12.NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS, OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. 270 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 270 of 2882 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 7th day of April, 2026, by the following vote: Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: ________ Kitty Moore, Mayor City of Cupertino ________________________ Date ATTEST: ________________________ Lauren Sapudar, City Clerk ________________________ Date 271 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 271 of 2882 Housing Accountability Act (HAA) The Housing Accountability Act (HAA), codified in California Government Code § 65589.5, prohibits cities from disapproving, or adding conditions of approval that would render infeasible, a housing development project unless the proposal is found to be in violation of an objective general plan or zoning standard, unless otherwise waived or reduced through use of the Density Bonus law, or the project will result in a specific adverse impact to public health and safety. While changes to the project may be applied by the decision-making, or hearing body to further applicable City goals, policies, and strategies – any changes required by the decision-making, or hearing body that are not based on objective standards may not result in making the project, as proposed, infeasible or reduce the number of housing units. Housing Crisis Act (HCA) The Housing Crisis Act (HCA), adopted in 2019 under Senate Bill 330, and amended in 2021 by Senate Bill 8, broadly aims to address actions that would decrease or delay the approval and development of new housing by requiring the timely processing of permits by local agencies. Among many components, the law includes a provision to allow applicants to vest ("lock-in") fees, ordinances, policies, and standards that are in effect at the time of submittal of a SB330 preliminary application to the City. Only the limited information specified in State law is required for the submittal of a SB330 preliminary application. Further, the law prohibits the City from conducting more than five hearings, or meetings, in connection with the approval of a housing development project. State Density Bonus Law (SDBL) California’s Density Bonus Law (SDBL), codified in California Government Code § 65915- 65918, aims to promote and facilitate the creation of affordable units in new housing projects by allowing: • A density "bonus" that allows for an increase to a property’s base density (I.e., more market rate units than allowed by the density, as determined by the specific percentage and level of affordability of the affordable units included in a project.); • Unlimited waivers to development standards that would physically preclude the construction of the project as designed (I.e., modifications or elimination of any development standard ); • Concessions that modify development standards to achieve an identifiable and actual cost reduction (i.e., Specified number of incentives as identified in state law based on the level of affordability and percentage of affordable units ); and • Reduced parking standards. Parking standards identified in state law by project type, proximity of transit facilities, affordability level of the development (or affordable units) and/or number of bedrooms ). 272 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 272 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 12/18/25) 0030-001 Page 1 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com September 5, 2024 (revised December 18, 2025) Kevin Choy Harvest Properties, Inc. 530-574-5339 | kchoy@harvestproperties.com Dear Kevin, This revised arborist report addresses the proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino. This revision addresses comments from the city and their contract arborist. Changes to the report are highlighted in red text for visibility. For this report, I referenced the following: • Email communication with Catherine Tarone, Cupertino Planning, on April 8, 2024 • City of Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 14.18 (Protected Trees) and 19.28.120 (Privacy Planting) • Title survey by Slooten Consulting, Inc. (undated) • Plans by CBG Civil Engineers (December 24, 2025) • Landscape plans by GATES + Associates (December 24, 2025) • Planning & city consulting arborist comments (September 2 & 13, 2025) The definitions of “protected tree” in the ordinance (14.18.050) covers several categories, including “heritage trees”, “mature specimen trees”, “privacy planting”, and “development trees”. For this property, the defining category is “development tree”. Per my emails with the city, “any property with a P in front of the zoning means Planned Unit Development and all trees on these properties are considered Development Trees”. Therefore, every tree on the property is considered protected. 273 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 273 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 12/18/25) 0030-001 Page 2 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com Table of Contents Site & Project Summary ................................................................................................................ 3 Assumptions & Limitations ............................................................................................................ 4 Observations & Discussion of Tree Impact ................................................................................... 5 Native species ........................................................................................................................... 6 Anticipated construction impacts ............................................................................................... 6 Proposed replacement trees ....................................................................................................... 10 Tree Protection Recommendations ............................................................................................ 10 Appendix 1: Tree Inventory Table ............................................................................................... 13 Removal rationale per CMC 14.18.180 Review, Determination and Findings ........................ 14 Appendix 2: Tree Protection Plan ............................................................................................... 31 274 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 274 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 12/18/25) 0030-001 Page 3 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com Site & Project Summary The project site is a large commercial property made up of four separate parcels, for a total of 6.93 acres. To the west is a Whole Foods, church, and single-family residential properties; to the right is a commercial property. Nine separate structures are roughly placed in 2 parallel rows in a north-south orientation; the remaining area is made up of parking lot and relatively small landscape planters. One dedicated entry way bisects the property and connects Alves Drive to Stevens Creek Blvd, but it also shares a second entryway – at the southeast corner – with the adjacent plaza. The single-family residential properties at the northwest corner harken to the transition zone to more residential properties to the north. The current use is a mix of commercial purposes, including food businesses in the southeast building and office or medical uses in the remaining buildings. In addition to Apple offices, the site also houses Cupertino and Burbank Sanitary Districts. I included 269 trees in my tree inventory, including 18 off-site trees. The high tree count is possible only because of the density of the tree plantings, which feature many trees in crowded landscape areas that are too small to support their mature size (Figure 1). There is a low to moderate degree of species and size diversity in the tree canopy. 23 species were recorded, including three California-native species (coast live oak, coast redwood, Monterey pine). The coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens) is the most abundant tree with 75 individuals, making up 27.9% of the total. It is distantly followed by 37 Japanese maples (Acer palmatum, 13.8%) and 32 crape myrtles (Lagerstroemia CV, 11.9%). The City-owned street trees consist of 6 Callery pears (Pyrus calleryana), while the other 12 off-site trees include Canary Island pines (Pinus canariensis), coast live oaks (Quercus agrifolia) and Brazilian peppers (Schinus terebinthifolia) along the west property line. The proposed project will clear the property to build a total of 122 units of housing, including 66 single-family detached homes and 56 multi-family units (in buildings of eight units each). The multi-family buildings are located on the south portion of the property, transitioning to single-family on the north side closer to the other single-family properties. The new homes and one mature tree, at most (sometimes 0 trees; #171- . 275 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 275 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 12/18/25) 0030-001 Page 4 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com associated driveways and utilities will essentially take up the entire site, requiring grading that basically spans property line to property line. All existing features, including almost every tree, will need to be demolished to complete the project. It is my opinion that 249 on-site trees will need to be removed, which only leaves two remaining trees within the site boundaries. The six Callery pears in the frontage sidewalk were originally proposed for removal on account of poor structure and species choice, but they will be retained per city request (Figure 2). The efforts of tree preservation are thus focused on a total of 20 trees within or adjacent to the site. Design changes were made to provide additional space along the west property line to reduce impact on those trees. The high number of tree removals means that mitigation requirements are high – I advise against trying to squeeze as many trees on site as possible. For long-term success, appropriate growing areas should be provided to avoid the same problems that affect the site today. Assumptions & Limitations The trees were not surveyed; their locations were approximated by me based on the survey. The accuracy of the tree protection recommendations thus may vary since they are based on estimated tree locations. For greater accuracy, survey the off-site trees. Precise locations of the on-site trees are less important because they will still be removed. The tree assessment provided by this report represents a snapshot in time of the trees’ conditions. It is not possible for arborists to predict long-term tree condition. Changes in weather/climate or environmental alterations can present unexpected impacts on the health and stability of trees (e.g. storm events, severe drought or heat, landscaping, repairs, irrigation reduction, other changes especially on adjacent properties). Specifically, Monterey pines are unpredictable in their rate of decline and may suddenly die within a few months. Because of these reasons, it is also not possible for arborists to guarantee that trees will not fail. To live with trees means to accept a certain level of risk, which can only be fully eliminated by removing the trees. Figure 2. Callery pear #233 is one of the 6 sidewalk trees. They were originally proposed for removal but in cut-outs that are similar -outs. 276 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 276 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 12/18/25) 0030-001 Page 5 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com Observations & Discussion of Tree Impact Most of the site is covered by buildings and hardscape. Landscape areas are mainly restricted to narrow planting strips between the buildings and walkways/parking. Tree distribution is good, with large trees in larger connecting planting areas. Smaller trees are squeezed in between buildings and in raised planters. In spite of the limited landscape area, the total number of trees is exceptionally high at 269 - which is achieved through overplanting, resulting in overly crowded trees. This approach to tree planting is common in office & industrial parks, especially if there are minimum requirements for tree planting. If enough space were given to allow the trees to grow to their full size, there would be far fewer trees on the property. Unfortunately, high tree density usually translates to high tree removals during construction projects. The 269 trees are divided into 23 species, outlined in the table below, with coast redwoods being the dominant species. The California-native species will be briefly discussed. African fern pine Afrocarpus falcatus 5 1.86 Ornamental Bottlebrush Callistemon sp. 13 4.83 Ornamental Brazilian pepper Schinus terebinthifolia 8 2.97 Ornamental Brisbane box Lophostemon confertus 1 0.37 Ornamental Callery pear Pyrus calleryana 11 4.09 Ornamental Canary Island pine Pinus canariensis 12 4.46 Ornamental Cheesewood Pittosporum tobira 4 1.49 Ornamental Chinese pistache Pistacia chinensis 2 0.74 Ornamental Coast live oak Quercus agrifolia 2 0.74 Native species Coast redwood Sequoia sempervirens 75 27.88 Native to California, but not locally. High water species. Crape myrtle Lagerstroemia CV 32 11.90 Ornamental Deodar cedar Cedrus deodara 2 0.74 Ornamental Evergreen pear Pyrus kawakamii 6 2.23 Ornamental Hackberry Celtis sp. 12 4.46 Ornamental Japanese maple Acer palmatum CV 37 13.75 Ornamental Monterey pine Pinus radiata 1 0.37 Native to California, but not locally. Easily drought stressed species. Olive Olea europea 1 0.37 Ornamental Purple leaf plum Prunus cerasifera 8 2.97 Ornamental Seaside pittosporum Pittosporum tenuifolium 5 1.86 Ornamental Sweet bay Laurus nobilis 2 0.74 Ornamental Sweet gum Liquidambar styraciflua 20 7.43 Ornamental Water gum Tristaniopsis laurina 8 2.97 Ornamental White birch Betula pendula 2 0.74 Ornamental 277 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 277 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 12/18/25) 0030-001 Page 6 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com Native species There are three California-native species on the site: coast live oak, coast redwood, Monterey pine. The most abundant species is coast redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), which is native to the coast and not Cupertino. In their natural habitat, they receive a significant amount of water through fog. In warmer inland regions like Cupertino, redwoods must be sustained by high quantities of water which is at odds with state & local water restrictions (Figure 3). A spectrum of drought stress is reflected in tree health in the on-site trees – the healthy redwoods (#235-244) at the southwest end are relatively protected by two buildings, while the redwoods at the east property line are more exposed and stressed. Some of the redwoods on the east side have died or were pruned aggressively to clear the power lines. Since they are large trees, they also need more of their root systems preserved to remain healthy and stable after construction. Unfortunately, due to the density of the new development, adequate space cannot be provided. All 75 redwoods will be removed for construction. There is only one Monterey pine (Pinus radiata), found at the north property line, which will also be removed as part of the project. Monterey pines are also native to the coast, so they easily succumb to drought stress and beetle attack in warmer regions. Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) is the only species that is native to this specific region, making it well adapted to dry and hot summers. The two oaks are both off-site, about 4’-10’ west of the fence (#260 & 264, Figure 5). These two trees are among the 20 trees that will be preserved. Anticipated construction impacts The roads, homes, and utilities proposed for the project almost cover the entire property. It is expected that all existing features will be demolished, and the site will be graded nearly property line to property line. Silva cells will be incorporated into the new stormwater system; the structures are designed to support surfaces while providing a belowground reservoir for uncompacted soil and water. Unfortunately, while they benefit newly planted trees, they are often at odds with existing trees. Silva cell installation requires excavation and ends up removing a lot of tree roots (Figure 3). With infrastructure requirements, it’s not possible to -132 will be removed due to proposed 278 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 278 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 12/18/25) 0030-001 Page 7 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com provide enough above- & below-ground space to save the on-site trees. Thus, all but two on-site trees will be removed (total 249 on-site trees). The remaining two on-site trees are Canary Island pines #142 & 143 at the northwest corner. The primary impact on the two trees will be from hardscape installation – encroaching as close as 3’ from tree #143, and 6’-12’ from tree #142. Although a 3’ clearance sounds excessively close, there is a large utility box within this area, and a sidewalk further away. Both features may have limited root growth into the area that will encompass the new sidewalk and walkways. Canary Island pines are also tolerant of root loss, especially when they are healthy like these two specimens. The contractors should switch to hand digging near the trunk, which will allow for more careful excavation around larger roots. An arborist should also be retained to review the roots before they are cut. Additionally, there are six Callery pears growing in sidewalk planters along the Stevens Creek Blvd frontage (Pyrus calleryana, Figure 2). They include trees #2, 5, 7, 8, 10 & 233; I assume these are City-owned trees. The pears are relatively young trees but are close to their maximum height. Although this tree has excellent fall color and attractive flowers, its benefits stop there. The species is notorious for its poor structure, as evidenced by multiple narrow stems that originate from the same height on the trunk. As each stem grows thicker, it pushes on its neighbor and the weakest stem(s) will break. Additionally, it’s highly susceptible to fire blight, a bacterial disease spread by rain & pollinators. The disease kills branch tips and continues to progress lower in the tree. To manage this disease, the trees must be regularly sprayed before infection begins, and branches must be pruned several inches below the affected area. Over time, Callery pears are often disfigured by management pruning. These trees were originally proposed for removal because of their structure and species, but they will now be retained per city request. Based on the latest landscape plans, the new sidewalk planters will be the same size or slightly larger. Since there is evidence of concrete lifting and/or repair, excavation should proceed by hand around larger roots. An arborist should be consulted for recommendations if roots > 1” diameter and larger are encountered. The majority of the tree protection efforts are focused on the 12 off- site trees along the -254 shown above). The landscape area should 279 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 279 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 12/18/25) 0030-001 Page 8 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com west property line. Minimizing impact to off-site trees is crucial – legally, a property owner does not have the right to harm their neighbors’ trees. There are nine Canary Island pines planted next to the Whole Foods building, approximately 6’ from the property line fence (Pinus canariensis, trees #250-258; Figure 4). A short concrete border is visible below the fence, but its depth is not clear. On the subject property, there is a tall retaining wall by trees #250 & 251 and a wider landscape area by trees #252-258. If the concrete border extends several feet below grade, it may act as a root barrier, but roots will often return to the surface once they bypass the barrier. The existing parking lot may have limited root growth – the subgrade is normally very compacted and unattractive for roots. Over time, as asphalt degrades and becomes more permeable to water, roots may start to extend under the pavement. To be safe, I assume that roots will have grown past the property line into the landscape area. The adjacent street was originally much closer to the property line, which would have damaged the roots of the pines. I recommended that the design be changed to preserve the existing landscape area, thereby protecting most of the roots on the subject property. While the road was shifted, a new storm drain will run parallel to the property line through the landscape area. Because of site constraints, it may be difficult to further relocate this line, especially with four other utilities running through the street. I highly recommend exploring methods that do not involve open trenching to avoid damaging large roots; excavation should only proceed with an arborist on site. The latest grading plan also shows a 3.5’ tall retaining wall at 5’ from the property line. This puts the new wall just outside the existing landscape area in the current parking lot. The wall will be ~11’ from the trees, which is an acceptable distance especially since their roots have already been affected by the asphalt. There are no substantial changes to my recommendations, except that an arborist should also be present when the wall footing is excavated. North of the pines are two coast live oaks (Quercus agrifolia, #260 & 264, Figure 5). They are young and healthy, therefore more resilient to construction impacts. Proposed grading will start at the property line with the following impacts: • Tree #260: >3’ drop over about 16’; grading starts 8’ from the tree. Impact is low, no changes to recommendations (Should the contractors encounter roots > 1” diameter by tree #260, they should consult an arborist for recommendations.) • Tree #264: 1.5’ drop starting 4’ from the trunk. Impact is likely acceptable, but an arborist shall monitor the process to prevent unnecessary root damage. 280 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 280 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 12/18/25) 0030-001 Page 9 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com The last off-site tree is a Brazilian pepper at the north end of the site (Schinus terebinthifolia, #266, Figure 6). This species is notoriously weedy, in part due to its seed production and highly variable habit. It can grow as a vine, shrub, and tree - all on the same plant. This specimen is more like a grove of multiple volunteers. The Brazilian peppers I reviewed for this project have disproportionately high numbers of trunks relative to the size of their canopies. If the trees had 1/3 to 1/2 of their current trunks, they would still have a similar-sized canopy – instead, each trunk only supports a smaller percentage of the total foliage. The species has a good tolerance to construction impacts, but I still recommend having an arborist on site while the road is graded next to the tree. Minor grading is expected, with a half foot drop down from the property line. Some root pruning is likely to occur, so supplemental irrigation is needed to mitigate stress that may result. The method of watering will likely vary depending on the stage of construction, e.g. using water trucks early on when water lines are not complete. In addition to being cautious during excavation, the adjacent landscape areas must also be protected with temporary fencing once excavation is completed – this applies to any tree that is retained. While it may seem insignificant, construction can cause a lot of damage to trees even through indirect activities. Because the site is level and accessible, the contractors are likely to spread their materials and equipment throughout the whole site. Those activities can compact and contaminate soils within the trees’ root zones. When soil is compacted, space for roots, oxygen, and water become limited. Over time, tree health can decline as the roots struggle to access the resources they need. It can take many years for the negative impacts to show, at which time it is usually too late (and very expensive) to reverse the impacts. The simplest way of protecting the soil and roots is to install a temporary chain-link fence to create a no-impact zone around the trees. Alternatively, a combination of wood chips & steel plates or thick plywood may be used. The goal of these methods is to create a buffer over the soil and roots. Other alternatives can be considered but should be discussed with an arborist. Since the fenced area serves as a “tree protection zone”, any work that requires digging should be kept outside of the fence. Otherwise, an arborist needs to review and approve the work so that the appropriate measures can be taken to maintain low impact. An -site to monitor grading next to this cluster. 281 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 281 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 12/18/25) 0030-001 Page 10 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com Proposed replacement trees The September 2, 2025 arborist peer review includes this comment on page 3: “It was not clear whether a certified arborist has assessed whether replacement trees can be reasonably planted on the subject property. Given the overcrowded planting in the existing conditions, replacement on-site at current or higher density is not appropriate.” The proposed planting plan includes 65 trees that will become large at maturity (Armstrong maple, ginkgo, live oak, Chinese elm). Smaller trees are disregarded for this discussion. The largest oaks are placed together in a courtyard, where there is more space compared to landscape areas between buildings and hardscape. None of them will have an ideal amount of space, since new utilities and hardscape must also be installed throughout or adjacent to landscape areas. This is the unfortunate reality of tree planting requirements in urban or suburban developments, where there are many demands on space. It is my opinion that the number of trees that have been specified is a reasonable compromise and offers a reduction in tree density (currently, there are 129 large trees on the site). Tree Protection Recommendations Design Phase • As the design progresses, ensure that the native grade is not disturbed within the temporary fencing area that is highlighted in the Tree Protection Plan that accompanies this report. o If encroachment is needed within the fenced area, discuss the impacts with the Project Arborist before finalizing the design. o Additional tree protection measures may be needed, including but not limited to: digging by hand or with air/water-assisted methods; providing supplemental irrigation; arborist monitoring during excavation. If the measures are not feasible, the trees may need to be removed. • If the off-site trees are surveyed, the Project Arborist shall review updated plans to determine whether the tree protection recommendations still apply. • Include a note in construction documents (on relevant sheets) that less invasive methods of excavation may be needed around trees #250-259 if significant roots are encountered within 12”-18” of existing grade. Methods may include but are not limited to air/water-assisted excavation tools, directional boring, hand digging, etc. Pre-Demolition Phase • Contractors: o Inform all contractors and subcontractors of the significance of protecting the off-site trees, as the financial consequences for tree damage may be significant (both in city fees and claims from off-site tree owners). A pre-construction meeting may be needed to review the tree protection measures and work plan before demolition begins. o Keep your Project Arborist informed of the construction schedule, especially the excavation phases where monitoring or recommendations are needed. 282 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 282 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 12/18/25) 0030-001 Page 11 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com • Temporary tree fencing: o Before equipment arrives on site, install temporary 6’ chain-link fencing around trees #2, 5, 7, 8, 10, 142, 143, 233, 252-258, 260 & 264 as noted on the Tree Protection Plan. o Leave additional fencing by tree #252 so the protection area can be expanded to include trees #250 & 251 after demolition is completed. o If the fencing location(s) will obstruct construction access, discuss other options with the Project Arborist. o The fencing shall stay upright and secure throughout the project. To modify the fencing, consult the Project Arborist to determine what substitute tree protection measures are needed to provide the same degree of protection. Fencing shall not be moved or adjusted without the Project Arborist’s approval. • Pruning: Limit clearance pruning to the bare minimum, i.e. enough to just clear the air space needed for construction. Pruning shall be done by a tree service with a certified arborist on- staff, before construction begins. • Wood chips, optional: If desired, spread the wood chips generated by tree removal within the fenced areas. The wood chips will conserve water and contribute nutrients to the trees; they can also be left in place after construction. Demolition Phase • Remove every tree EXCEPT trees #2, 5, 7, 8, 10, 142, 143, 233, 252-258, 260 & 264 (249 trees to be removed; 20 trees to remain). • After demolition is completed, extend the tree protection fencing to enclose trees #250 & 251 as noted on the Tree Protection Plan. Construction Phase • The Project Arborist shall be on-site during storm drain and retaining wall excavation by Canary Island pines #250-259. If significant roots are encountered within 12”-18” of existing grade, less invasive methods may be needed (e.g. air/water-assisted excavation methods; directional boring, hand digging). Once the storm drain is completed, fencing must be immediately reinstalled. • The Project Arborist shall also be on-site during grading for the road by coast live oak #264 and Brazilian pepper #266. Regularly moisten the soil by this tree with methods available during that phase of construction (e.g. water truck, soaker hoses). • If roots > 1” diameter are encountered during excavation or grading by coast live oak #260, consult the Project Arborist for recommendations. • For Canary Island pines #142 & 143, hand excavate along the sidewalk within 8' of trunk. Consult the Project Arborist for recommendations before root pruning. • For sidewalk pear trees #2, 5, 7, 8, 10 & 233, hand excavate around roots > 1” diameter or larger. Consult the Project Arborist for recommendations before root pruning. • All root pruning shall be completed with sharp tools (hand pruners, loppers, handsaw, Sawzall, or circular saw), making the smallest possible cut – perpendicular to the length of the root rather than at a diagonal. Roots must then be covered and kept moist until the soil is backfilled. • At any time, if damage occurs to any tree, immediately consult the Project Arborist for recommendations on how to mitigate the damage. 283 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 283 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 12/18/25) 0030-001 Page 12 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com Post-Construction Phase • If the Project Arborist deems it necessary during construction, supplemental irrigation should be provided for one growing season after construction is completed (~9 months). A temporary option with soaker hoses may be used. The hoses should be laid out as close to the edge of the tree canopies as possible. Leave them at a slow drip rate for 8 hours once a month (overnight is ideal). The irrigation off-sets water stress that may result from root pruning. The tree inventory table & tree protection plan are attached after this page. Should you have any questions or need clarification, please reach out at any time. Sincerely, Jennifer Tso Michelia Arboriculture, LLC Board Certified Master Arborist #WE-10270B 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com 284 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 284 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 12/18/25) 0030-001 Page 13 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com Appendix 1: Tree Inventory Table The tree inventory table includes individual tree data as required by the City of Cupertino. The data is explained as follows: ID # trees are not tagged if their trunks are not accessible from the property; tags may be applied to the property line fence if feasible. Note: tree #105 is a shrub and was Species DBH diameter tape. For off-site or inaccessible trees, the trunk size may be visually Health • Good: The tree is growing well with vigor appropriate for its age – canopy is full with good color. Pest or disease issues may be present but have low impact on the tree. • Fair: The tree is showing signs of stress, exhibited as sparseness of canopy, change in foliage color, and minor-moderate signs of pest or disease issues. It can recover as long as conditions naturally improve. • Poor: The tree is stressed with tip dieback; it is unable to overcome pest & disease issues. Immediate long-term intervention and care is needed to avoid decline to the point of non-recovery. • Very Poor: The tree has significant issues and has declined so far that it is unlikely to recover. • Structure • Good: The tree has ideal trunk & branch architecture. • Fair: Branch defects, poor attachments and decay may be present, but they can be mitigated with 1-2 pruning cycles (over 3-5 years). • Poor: Defects cannot be mitigated without long term management (10+ years); support systems like cabling and bolting may be needed in conjunction with pruning to reduce risk to the property. • Very Poor: The tree has significant issues that cannot be corrected and Dripline Appraised Value For trees > 36” diameter, appraised values were estimated for mitigation purposes. An estimate of the value of each tree is obtained based on best practices, using the Trunk Formula Technique outlined in the 10th Edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal by the Council of Tree & Landscape Appraisers (CTLA). The cost to replace a perfect specimen of like-size is calculated, then depreciated by the subject tree’s current health, structure, form, factors that are inherent to the species Notes Actions measures. Includes reason for removals per CMC 14.18.180 Review, Determination and Findings. 285 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 285 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 12/18/25) 0030-001 Page 14 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com Removal rationale per CMC 14.18.180 Review, Determination and Findings Per the city’s completeness comments, the tree inventory table was updated with the reason for tree removal, according to code section CMC 14.18.180. The descriptions are as follows: 1. That the tree or trees are irreversibly diseased, are in danger of falling, can cause potential damage to existing or proposed essential structures, or interferes with private on-site utility services and cannot be controlled or remedied through reasonable relocation or modification of the structure or utility services; 2. That the location of the trees restricts the economic enjoyment of the property by severely limiting the use of property in a manner not typically experienced by owners of similarly zoned and situated property, and the applicant has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the approval authority that there are no reasonable alternatives to preserve the tree(s). 3. That the protected tree(s) are a detriment to the subject property and cannot be adequately supported according to good urban forestry practices due to the overplanting or overcrowding of trees on the subject property. 4. That the mature specimen trees with single trunk between twelve inches DBH and twenty-four inches DBH, or multi-trunk between twenty-four inches DBH and forty-eight inches DBH in R1, A1, A, RHS, and R2 zones will be replaced by planting a replacement tree and/or by contribution to the City’s Tree Fund. Not applicable to property. In the “Actions” column of the tree inventory table, a number was assigned with a brief explanation as to how the removal fits into one of the categories. For example, “1-dying” indicates a tree that falls under the first removal category – one that is in very poor health and will not recover. Most of the trees fall under “2-economic use” since they will be difficult to preserve in the face of the proposed project. 286 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 286 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 15 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 1 Callery pear 8.5 Good Good-Fair 6, 8, 9, 8 Fire blight, overpruned. Surface roots, lifting bricks along sidewalk. Remove. 2 - economic use 2 Callery pear 8 Good-Fair Fair 9, 6, 6, 9 Fire blight. Overpruned especially on street side. Surface roots, lifting sidewalk pavers in 3 areas. Proposed sidewalk planter same size as existing. Protect with temporary fencing. Hand excavate around roots > 1" and larger and consult arborist for Sidewalk tree (city/off-site?). shoots, some stunted. Lifting pavers along sidewalk. Proposed sidewalk planter same size as existing. Protect with temporary fencing. Hand excavate around roots > 1" and larger and consult arborist for Sidewalk tree (city/off-site?). trunk sunburned. Cracking and lifting concrete and pavers around planter. Proposed sidewalk planter same fencing. Hand excavate around roots > 1" and larger and consult arborist for recommendations. Sidewalk tree (city/off-site?). shoots. Crowded codominant stems. Proposed sidewalk Sidewalk tree (city/off-site?). canopy. Crowded stems all arise at 10' above grade. Proposed sidewalk planter same size as existing. Protect with temporary fencing. Hand excavate around roots > 1" and larger and consult arborist for 287 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 287 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 16 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 13 Purple leaf plum 6.5 Good Fair-Poor 6, 6, 5, 11 Lions tailed.Remove. 2 - economic use 14 Purple leaf plum 8 Good Fair-Poor 10, 6, 6, 11 Lions tailed.Remove. 2 - economic use 15 Hackberry 5.5 Good Good-Fair 11, 10, 13, 12 Species with corky bark protrusions. Overpruned in past, resulting in vigorous new growth. Remove. 2 - economic use 16 Sweet bay 3 Good Fair 3, 4, 2, 2 Still staked, significant trunk damage on W - may be rubbing or sunburn. Remove. 2 - economic use 17 Hackberry 7 Good Good-Fair 12, 11, 11, 12 Species with corky bark protrusions. Previously topped, resulting in very vigorous new growth. Remove. 2 - economic use 18 Sweet bay 5.5 Good Good 7, 6, 6, 7 Sunburn on W side of tree. Trunk shape elliptical, metal grate has been cut away for trunk. Remove. 2 - economic use 19 Hackberry 11 Excellent Fair 14, 17, 14, 15 Species with corky bark protrusions. Previously topped, resulting in very vigorous new growth. Remove. 2 - economic use 20 Chinese pistache 7 Good Fair 7, 8, 10, 8 Codominant stems at 7'.Remove. 2 - economic use 21 Chinese pistache 7 Good Good 10, 6, 7, 12 Branches torn off on E side.Remove. 2 - economic use 22 Hackberry 9.5 Good Good 6, 9, 10, 8 Smooth-barked species. Canopy relatively small. Lions tailed. Remove. 2 - economic use 23 Hackberry 8.5 Good Good-Fair 7, 8, 6, 12 Smooth-barked species. Lions tailed. Elliptical shaped trunk. Sunburn on E side. Remove. 2 - economic use 24 Hackberry 8.5 Good Good-Fair 6, 6, 9, 8 Smooth-barked species. N curb cracked. Large scaffold at 6'. Lions tailed. Remove. 2 - economic use 25 Hackberry 8 Good Good 6, 9, 8, 8 Smooth-barked species. Car damage to N side of trunk.Remove. 2 - economic use 26 Hackberry 9 Good Fair 7, 7, 5, 7 Smooth-barked species. Lions tailed.Remove. 2 - economic use 27 Hackberry 5.5 Good Good 7, 4, 6, 7 Smooth-barked species. Small canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 28 Hackberry 10.5 Good Fair 7, 8, 9, 12 Smooth-barked species. Lions tailed.Remove. 2 - economic use 29 Hackberry 6.5 Good Good-Fair 3, 7, 7, 8 Species with corky bark protrusions. Narrow canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 30 Hackberry 6 Good Fair 8, 10, 7, 12 Species with corky bark protrusions. Lions tailed.Remove. 2 - economic use 288 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 288 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 17 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 31 Coast redwood 20 Fair-Poor Good 7, 10, 9, 8 Sparse canopy with stunted growth. Hangers in tree. New sidewalk and ramp around tree. Remove. 2 - economic use 32 Coast redwood 16 Dead Dead 5, 4, 7, 9 Basically dead.Remove. 1- dying 33 Coast redwood 20 Fair Good 15, 12, 5, 6 Sparse canopy, esp. at top (appears fuller in photo). Branch failures on roof. Remove. 2 - economic use 34 Coast redwood 22 Good Good 16, 6, 10, 11 Slightly sparse canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 35 Coast redwood 23 Good-Fair Good 8, 8, 7, 12 Slightly sparse canopy, especially at top.Remove. 2 - economic use 36 Coast redwood 19 Poor Good 12, 10, 8, 4 Very sparse canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 37 Coast redwood 15.5 Fair Good-Fair 9, 3, 10, 10 Sparse canopy, especially to E. Overall stunted in size, shortened branches to E. Remove. 2 - economic use 38 Coast redwood 30 Fair-Poor Good 14, 9, 10, 13 Sparse, stunted and chlorotic canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 39 Coast redwood 23 Fair-Poor Good 7, 11, 8, 10 Sparse and stunted canopy with chlorotic needles. Cracking curb. Remove. 2 - economic use 40 Coast redwood 24 Good-Fair Good 7, 12, 8, 14 Slightly sparse canopy. Cracking curb.Remove. 2 - economic use 41 Coast redwood 24.5 Good Good 12, 14, 8, 12 Remove. 2 - economic use 42 Water gum 3 Fair-Poor Good 5, 2, 2, 3 Sparse and stunted.Remove. 2 - economic use 43 Water gum 5 Fair Good 7, 3, 3, 5 Stunted, chlorotic and sparse canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 44 Sweet gum 13.5 Good-Fair Fair 12, 9, 12, 12 Dead 3" branch to SE over walkway, 2" towards parking space. Remove. 2 - economic use 45 Japanese maple 3.5, 2.5, 3.5, 3, 2, economic use 289 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 289 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 18 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 49 Coast redwood 20 Fair Good 10, 8, 10, 11 Sparse and chlorotic canopy, especially at top.Remove. 2 - economic use 50 Coast redwood 28 Fair Good 13, 9, 8, 15 Sparse and chlorotic canopy, especially at top.Remove. 2 - economic use 51 Coast redwood 38.5 Fair-Poor Good-Fair 7, 12, 14, 12 $7,200.00 Subordinated vertical stem at 25' above grade. Fuzzy shoots along elongated branches. Concrete steps raised, concrete walkway cracked and lifted. Electrical box raised above grade. Property to E drops several feet into economic use 290 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 290 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 19 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 66 Bottlebrush 4, 4.5, 4 Good Fair 4, 1, 2, 3 Remove. 2 - economic use 67 Coast redwood 14.5 Poor Good-Fair 12, 6, 9, 4 Sparse, stunted and chlorotic canopy with dead branches. Remove. 2 - economic use 68 Coast redwood 16.5 Fair-Poor Good 2, 4, 12, 12 Sparse, stunted and chlorotic canopy. Trunk will eventually grow into building. Remove. 2 - economic use 69 Bottlebrush 1, 1.5, 1.5 Fair-Poor Fair 3, 2, 2, 2 Half of stems are dead (excluded from diameter). Remove. 2 - economic use 70 Coast redwood 20.5 Fair Good-Fair 10, 8, 10, 9 Sparse, stunted and chlorotic canopy. Pruned away from high voltage along E property line. Remove. 2 - economic use 71 Bottlebrush 2.5, 2.5, 4 Fair Fair 1, 2, 5, 3 Includes second trunk. Did not respond well to being topped, minimal canopy. Remove. 2 - economic use 72 Coast redwood 21 Very Poor/Dead Fair-Poor 3, 6, 3, 3 Upper canopy mostly dead, branches cleared from power lines. Sparse, stunted and chlorotic lower canopy. Remove. 1- dying 73 Coast redwood 5 Good-Fair Good 5, 6, 3, 1 Understory, sparse.Remove. 2 - economic use 74 Coast redwood 24.5 Good Good 12, 7, 10, 10 Large circling root on S side of trunk.Remove. 2 - economic use 75 Coast redwood 32.5 Fair Good 28, 18, 20, 14 Sparse canopy. Cleared from power lines.Remove. 2 - economic use 76 Seaside pittosporum 1.5, 2.5, 3, 3.5 Fair Fair 10, 10, 5, 7 Excludes adjacent dead shrub. Remove. 2 - economic use 77 Seaside pittosporum 1.5, 1, 1, economic use 291 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 291 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 20 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 83 Coast redwood 21 Fair-Poor Fair 5, 10, 8, 12 Stunted, sparse and chlorotic canopy. Top dead. Elongated branches, pruned for power line clearance. Remove. 2 - economic use 84 Bottlebrush 5, 4, 5 Fair Fair 3, 4, 7, 7 Understory, omitted 2" dead stem.Remove. 2 - economic use 85 Coast redwood 23.5 Good Good 12, 10, 8, 12 Pruned for power line clearance.Remove. 2 - economic use 86 Bottlebrush 3.5, 3.5, 6.5 Fair Fair-Poor 8, 0, 0, 1 One of the 3" stems is basically dead. Phototropic lean to N. Remove. 2 - economic use 87 Bottlebrush 3, 3.5 Fair Fair-Poor 8, 3, 0, 3 Stems bowed to N over #88; omitted small dead stems. Remove. 2 - economic use 88 Bottlebrush 5, 4.5, 9 Fair Fair 5, 3, 2, 6 Crowded by #87. 9" stem was topped with no foliage. Remove. 2 - economic use 89 African fern pine 12 Poor Fair 10, 10, 11, 7 Very sparse and chlorotic.Remove. 2 - economic use 90 African fern pine 20 Fair Good-Fair 16, 8, 10, 14 Full but chlorotic canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 91 African fern pine 20 Fair Fair 10, 17, 20, 18 Slightly sparse but very chlorotic canopy. Multiple crowded codominant stems at 15' above grade. Remove. 2 - economic use 92 Japanese maple 1, 1, 0.5, 1, 1, 1.5 Good Good 2, 5, 1, 5 Remove. 2 - economic use 93 Japanese maple 2 Good-Fair Good 1, 2, 2, 2 Recently planted, diameter at base. (DBH is ~3 stems at 0.3") Remove. 2 - economic use 94 Japanese maple 3, 3, 3, 2 Fair Good 3, 3, 5, 4 Sparse canopy with stunted epicormic shoots. Sunburn on one of the stems. Remove. 2 - economic use 95 Japanese maple (Bloodgood) 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 1 Fair Good 4, 2, 5, 4 Minimal lower canopy, branch dieback. In raised planter.Remove. 2 - economic use 96 Japanese maple 5, 5 Good Good 8, 4, 6, 8 Lower branches / twigs stunted or dead.Remove. 2 - economic use 97 Japanese maple 3, 3, 4, 2, 4 Good-Fair Good 6, 6, 7, 6 Upper canopy slightly sparse. Inner/lower twigs dead or slow. Remove. 2 - economic use 98 Japanese maple 4.5, 3.5 Good Good 3, 6, 7, 7 Remove. 2 - economic use 99 Japanese maple (Bloodgood) 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2.5 Fair Good 7, 7, 6, 4 Sparse canopy interior shoots slow.Remove. 2 - economic use 100 Japanese maple (CV) 3, 1, 1, 1.5, 1, 1.5, 1, 1 Fair-Poor Good 2, 3, 3, 4 Epicormic shoots, top dieback. Center stems damaged by sunburn. Remove. 2 - economic use 292 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 292 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 21 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 101 Japanese maple (Bloodgood) 1.5, 2, 2.5, planter. Remove. 2 - economic use 293 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 293 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 22 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 119 Crape myrtle 2, 1, 1, 1 Fair Good-Fair 5, 0, 4, 6 Slightly sparse canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 120 Sweet gum 11 Fair Fair 4, 3, 8, 9 Cavity on NE side at grade (odd, between roots). Sparse canopy. Vertical secondary stem at 10' above grade. Remove. 2 - economic use 121 Sweet gum 11 Fair Fair-Poor 11, 7, 12, 14 Lions tailed. Concrete walkway cracked to N.Remove. 2 - economic use 122 Sweet gum 11 Good Fair 12, 8, 3, 11 Lions tailed, but growing back. Walkway cracked to S.Remove. 2 - economic use 123 Sweet gum 13 Good Fair-Poor 7, 12, 10, 12 Curb and asphalt cracked and raised. Lions tailed.Remove. 2 - economic use 124 Sweet gum 9.5 Good Fair-Poor 8, 7, 6, 9 Lions tailed. Curb cracked but no raising.Remove. 2 - economic use 125 Sweet gum 33.5 Good Fair 10, 10, 12, 14 Lions tailed.Remove. 2 - economic use 126 Coast redwood 12 Poor-Very Poor Good 11, 6, 6, 11 Very sparse and stunted canopy.Remove. 1- dying 127 Coast redwood 20.5 Fair-Poor Good 9, 7, 9, 10 Top declining significantly.Remove. 2 - economic use 128 Coast redwood 36.5 Good-Fair Good 15, 12, 10, 14 $10,300.00 Slightly sparse canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 129 Coast redwood 35 Good-Fair Good 16, 10, 15, 15 Slightly sparse canopy. Sidewalk panel replaced 8' to NE. Remove. 2 - economic use 130 Coast redwood 32.5 Good-Fair Good 15, 14, 8, 9 Sidewalk panel replaced within 1' to N, apparently without cutting into the root mass in the lawn (visible bark). Slightly sparse canopy, top starting to die. On previous tree, top starting to die with codominant stems economic use 294 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 294 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 23 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 136 Crape myrtle 2 Good-Fair Good 2, 2, 2, 2 Young tree. Planted deep, slightly sparse canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 137 Deodar cedar 27.5 Good Fair 15, 20, 18, 15 replaced to N, asphalt in parking lot to S raised across 4 economic use 15 Sidewalk replaced to N, asphalt in parking lot to S raised economic use 12 needles turning chlorotic in lower canopy. Large canker economic use fencing. Hand excavate along sidewalk within 8' of trunk, consult arborist if roots > 2" diameter pine codominant stems at 5', one splits again into second set of codominant stems. Proposed sidewalk 3' from trunk; area partially covered by (E) hardscape. 144 Canary Island pine 15.5 Good Good-Fair 8, 8, 8, 8 Swooping lower trunk, lean corrected.Remove. 2 - economic use 145 Coast redwood 8 Good Good 6, 6, 6, 6 Remove. 2 - economic use 146 Coast redwood 9.5 Good Good 7, 7, 7, 7 Slightly stunted.Remove. 2 - economic use 147 Coast redwood 9.5 Good-Fair Good 6, 6, 6, 6 Slightly sparse canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 148 Coast redwood 7.5 Good Good 6, 6, 6, 6 Remove. 2 - economic use 149 Crape myrtle 9, 9, 11, 5, 4 Fair Good-Fair 15, 15, 12, 15 $11,700.00 Very large specimen, canopy only in upper half of tree. Canopy appears slightly sparse and stunted. Remove. 2 - economic use 150 Purple leaf plum 6, 5, 4.5, 4, 4, 3.5, 4.5 Good Fair 8, 12, 10, 8 Included bark in attachment. Over-raised.Remove. 2 - economic use 151 Crape myrtle 2, 2.5, 2.5, 1 Fair-Poor Fair 6, 6, 2, 8 Stunted and sparse canopy. Roots may be girdling.Remove. 2 - economic use 295 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 295 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 24 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 152 Crape myrtle 2.5, 2.5, 3, 1 Good-Fair Fair 7, 6, 2, 4 Remove. 2 - economic use 153 Crape myrtle 1.5, 2, 1.5, 1.5, 1.5 Fair-Poor Fair 7, 4, 2, 6 Slow to leaf out, stunted and sparse canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 154 Crape myrtle 4, 4.5, 3.5, 4.5, 3, 4.5, 3.5, 3, 4, economic use 2.5, 2.5, economic use 2, 1.5, 1, economic use 2.5, 1, 2, 2, economic use 18 asphalt curb/parking spaces. Lions tailed, chlorotic economic use 296 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 296 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 25 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 168 Evergreen pear 10 Fair Fair 8, 10, 8, 10 Fire blight and leaf spot causing defoliation.Remove. 2 - economic use 169 Crape myrtle 1, 1, 1, 8 x 1.5" Good-Fair Fair 6, 6, 6, 6 Slightly stunted.Remove. 2 - economic use 170 Coast redwood 26 Good-Fair Good 12, 12, 12, 12 steps recently replaced. Potential root extending N into 2 economic use already lifted, unknown if structural roots were cut during economic use 297 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 297 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 26 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 185 Crape myrtle 4.5 Good-Fair Good 6, 6, 6, 6 Slightly sparse canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 186 Crape myrtle 5.5 Good-Fair Good 6, 6, 6, 6 Slightly sparse canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 187 Crape myrtle 1, 1.5, 1.5, 2 Good Good-Fair 3, 6, 6, 4 Remove. 2 - economic use 188 Crape myrtle 3.5, 3.5, 2.5, 2.5 Good Fair 6, 6, 6, 6 Remove. 2 - economic use 189 Japanese maple (Bloodgood) 2.5, 2.5, 2 Good Fair 0, 6, 3, 6 Remove. 2 - economic use 190 Japanese maple (Bloodgood) 2, 1, 1.5, 1.5 Good Fair 0, 8, 5, 6 Remove. 2 - economic use 191 Crape myrtle 2, 2, 2, 1.5, 2.5 Fair Fair 3, 5, 5, 5 Slightly sparse and stunted canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 192 Crape myrtle 2, 1, 3.5, 3.5, 2, 3.5 Good Fair 6, 3, 6, 3 Remove. 2 - economic use 193 Crape myrtle 5.5 Good-Fair Fair 6, 7, 6, 6 Slow to leaf out, slightly sparse canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 194 Crape myrtle 6 Fair Fair 7, 7, 7, 7 Stunted and sparse canopy, slow to leaf out.Remove. 2 - economic use 195 Water gum 3.5 Good-Fair Good 3, 3, 3, 3 Sparse canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 196 Sweet gum 15 Good Fair 8, 10, 8, 10 Concrete walkway lifted at curb.Remove. 2 - economic use 197 Sweet gum 11.5 Fair-Poor Fair 8, 12, 10, 8 Dieback and sparse canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 198 Sweet gum 13 Good Good-Fair 10, 8, 6, 8 Large vertical scaffold at 10' above grade, other angled branches. Remove. 2 - economic use 199 Water gum 3 Good-Fair Good 3, 3, 3, 3 Slightly stunted and sparse canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 200 Coast redwood 35 Good-Fair Good-Fair 10, 10, 10, 10 upper 1/3 of trunk bare. Multiple hangers in canopy including over parking. Rest of canopy slightly sparse. economic use 298 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 298 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 27 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 202 Water gum 4 Fair Good 5, 5, 3, 3 Slightly sparse canopy, minimal canopy to SW.Remove. 2 - economic use 203 Sweet gum 13.5 Good-Fair Fair 10, 8, 8, 8 Large roots follow curb. Angled branches resulting from aggressive crown reduction. Branch dieback at top. Remove. 2 - economic use 204 Water gum 5 Fair-Poor Good 8, 6, 3, 4 Sparse and stunted canopy.Remove. 2 - economic use 205 Sweet gum 11.5 Good-Fair Fair 8, 8, 7, 8 Structural root follows curb and has started to spread over. Heavily reduced in past, resulting in acute angles. Remove. 2 - economic use 206 Sweet gum 14 Good Fair 10, 8, 6, 6 Roots follow curb.Remove. 2 - economic use 207 Japanese maple 6 Fair-Poor Fair 7, 2, 7, 3 Top died. Raised planter.Remove. 2 - economic use 208 Japanese maple (Bloodgood) 2.5, 6 x 1.5" Fair-Poor Fair 2, 3, 5, 2 Top declining, sparse canopy. Raised planter.Remove. 2 - economic use 209 Japanese maple (Bloodgood) 1, 1.5, 1.5, 1.5, 2.5 Good-Fair Good 6, 3, 6, 2 Slightly sparse canopy. Raised planter.Remove. 2 - economic use 210 Japanese maple (Bloodgood) 2.5, 2.5, 3 Good-Fair Good 6, 6, 5, 3 Slightly sparse canopy. Raised planter.Remove. 2 - economic use 211 Japanese maple (Sango-kaku) 1, 1, 6 x 1.5" Fair Good 3, 4, 3, 5 Sparse and stunted growth, tip dieback. Remove. 2 - economic use 212 Japanese maple 1.5, 1, 0.5, 0.5 Fair Good 5, 4, 1, 3 Sparse and slightly chlorotic canopy. Remove. 2 - economic use 213 Japanese maple 0.5, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1.5 Fair-Poor Good 4, 6, 6, 5 Sparse canopy with dieback, understory tree. Raised planter. Remove. 2 - economic use 214 African fern pine 23.5 Fair Fair 15, 18, 18, 20 Chlorotic canopy. Interior stripped out. Raised concrete walkway 15' to NW, unsure if related to this tree. Remove. 2 - economic use 215 Japanese maple (Bloodgood) 1.5, 1.5, 1.5, 1, 1, 1 Poor-Very Poor Fair 5, 2, 2, 2 Dying tree. Raised planter. Remove. 1- dying 216 Japanese maple 2.5, 2.5, 2.5 Poor Fair-Poor 6, 4, 0, 5 One of trunks dead, dieback on other. Other trunk likely to decline once branches are sunburned. Raised planter. Remove. 2 - economic use 217 Japanese maple (Bloodgood) 2, 2, 2, 1.5, 1 Good-Fair Good 6, 3, 6, 2 Slightly sparse canopy, in raised planter. Remove. 2 - economic use 218 Japanese maple (Bloodgood) - 1.5, 1 raised planter. economic use 299 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 299 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 28 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 219 Japanese maple (Bloodgood) - economic use (Bloodgood) branches at top. In round planter, roots exposed. Sparse economic use 1.5, 3.5, economic use 4, 2.5, 3.5, 10 economic use Sidewalk tree (city/off-site?). between 6'-7' above grade, two other stems already failed or removed. Curb replaced. Abundant sprouting. Proposed sidewalk planter larger than existing. fencing. Hand excavate around roots > 1" and larger and consult arborist for 300 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 300 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 29 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 234 Crape myrtle 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 2, 2.5, 3, economic use 12 E side of trunk. economic use 301 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 301 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 30 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 250 Canary Island pine Off-site tree. attachment. ~11' from proposed retaining wall; within temporary protection fencing. Arborist on-site during storm drain and retaining wall excavation; fencing to be reinstalled immediately after work is completed. pine Off-site tree. grade. ~11' from proposed retaining wall; within existing pine Off-site tree. narrow attachments. ~11' from proposed retaining wall; Off-site tree. Off-site tree. pine Off-site tree. lower trunk. Some dead branches to N. ~11' from pine Off-site tree. wire at 7' and 10' above grade. ~11' from proposed Off-site tree. pine Off-site tree. Lower trunk has slight but corrected lean. Trunk girdled at 7'. ~11' from proposed retaining wall; within existing 15 Off site tree, tag on fence. taken over fence, approx. 8' W of property line fence, grade, phototropic lean to N away from pepper. Proposed grading ~8' from trunk, more than 3' drop over 16' distance. fencing. Consult arborist for recommendations if roots > 1" are encountered during cracked by trunk. Branch tore out to E at 10' above economic use 5.5, 5, 5.5, 15 appears lions tailed. Many trunks. economic use 302 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 302 of 2882 Proposed residential development at 20807-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd, Cupertino September 5, 2024 (revised 5/15/25) 0030-001 Page 31 Michelia Arboriculture, LLC | 925-515-1362 | jennifer@micheliarborist.com ID # Species DBH (in) Health Structure Dripline (NESW, ft) Value 263 Bottlebrush 5, 6 Good-Fair Good 8, 6, 6, 0 Tree form. Ganoderma on E stem. Remove. 2 - economic use 264 Coast live oak 14 Good Fair 10, 12, 18, 18 Off-site tree, tag on fence. estimated (~4' from fence). Large secondary branches at base and at 5'. Proposed grading ~4' from trunk, drops fencing. Arborist on- site to monitor grading 4, 6, 4, 4, 5.5, 4, 4, 5, stunted and chlorotic. economic use 3, 3, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3 + Off-site tree, tag on fence. diameters not included) - likely shares a single root system. Likely volunteers from the trunk that was cut down on the site. Slightly stunted and chlorotic tips. Proposed grade will drop by 0.5' near tree. grading, water tree during construction. Moderate impact. 11.5, 10.5, 12, 13, trunks, includes vertical offshoot (same root system). Girdling root to S. Remove. 2 - economic use 2, 3.5, 2, economic use 1, 2, 2, 1.5, economic use Appendix 2: Tree Protection Plan The tree protection plan is attached as the next page. If it is missing, please contact me or the project manager for a copy. 303 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 303 of 2882 304 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 304 of 2882 City of Cupertino 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT December 2025 | CEQA Exemption Memorandum 305 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 305 of 2882 December 2025 | CEQA Exemption Memorandum 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT for City of Cupertino City of Cupertino Contact: Danielle Condit, Associate Planner 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 408.777.3214 Prepared by: PlaceWorks Contact: Rachel Goren, Associate 2040 Bancroft Way #400 Berkeley, California 94704 510.848.3815 www.placeworks.com 306 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 306 of 2882 DECEMBER 2025 i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Statutory Exemptions .............................................................................................. 1 2. Project Description ............................................................................................ 3 2.1 Regional Location .................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Project Site .............................................................................................................. 3 2.3 Land Use and Zoning Designations ......................................................................... 3 2.4 Proposed Project ..................................................................................................... 4 3. Findings Concerning CEQA Exemption................................................................ 7 3.1 Public Resources Code Section 21080.66 ............................................................... 7 3.2 Analysis in Support of Findings ............................................................................... 7 3.3 Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 21 Tables Table 1 Infill Requirements and Project Consistency ...................................................................... 8 Table 2 Environmental Criteria and Project Consistency .............................................................. 12 Table 3 Tribal Notification, Outreach, and Consultation Initiation................................................ 17 SOURCES All documents cited in this report and used in its preparation are hereby incorporated by reference into this document. Copies of documents referenced herein are available for review at the City of Cupertino Community Development Department at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014. 307 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 307 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO TABLE OF CONTENTS ii PlaceWorks This page is intentionally left blank. 308 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 308 of 2882 DECEMBER 2025 1 1. INTRODUCTION This section describes the standards for determining a significant effect on the environment from construction and operation of the proposed 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Residential Development (proposed project) pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City of Cupertino (City) is the lead agency for the proposed project. 1.1 STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS Once it is determined that an activity is a project subject to CEQA, it is then determined whether the project is exempt from CEQA. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b), a project is exempt from CEQA if: 1. The project is exempt by statute (see, e.g., Article 18, commencing with Section 15260). 2. The project is exempt pursuant to a categorical exemption (see Article 19, commencing with Section 15300) and the application of that categorical exemption is not barred by one of the exceptions set forth in Section 15300.2. 3. The activity is covered by the common-sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. 4. The project will be rejected or disapproved by a public agency (see Section 15270(b)). 5. The project is exempt pursuant to the provisions of Article 12.5 of Chapter 3. The proposed project would be exempt as a “statutory ” exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(1) because the proposed project would meet the requirements of the Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.66(a), as further discussed in Section 3, Findings Concerning CEQA Exemption. This document has been prepared to demonstrate CEQA compliance as it pertains to the proposed project. This document also provides information to decision makers regarding a finding that the proposed project is exempt under CEQA. 309 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 309 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 1. INTRODUCTION 2 PlaceWorks This page is intentionally left blank. 310 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 310 of 2882 DECEMBER 2025 3 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 REGIONAL LOCATION The project site is in the city of Cupertino, approximately 38 miles southeast of the city and county of San Francisco. Cupertino is on the western edge of Santa Clara County and north of the city of Saratoga, east of unincorporated Santa Clara County, south of the city of Sunnyvale, and west of the city of San José. Regional access to the project site is provided by Interstate 280 (I-280) via North Wolfe Road or North De Anza Boulevard to the north, and by Highway 85 via Stevens Creek Boulevard to the west. The City is also supported by Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) bus service and Caltrain via the Sunnyvale, Lawrence, and Santa Clara Caltrain stations. 2.2 PROJECT SITE The 6.93-acre project is at 20807, 20813, 20823, and 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard, between Saich Way and North Stelling Road, in an urbanized area. The project site is developed with commercial buildings and a surface parking lot with ornamental landscaping. The site is bounded by Alves Drive with single-family residences to the north; commercial development to the east; Stevens Creek Boulevard to the south; and commercial (Whole Foods), residential, institutional (church) development to the west. According to Plan Bay Area, the project site is within a Santa Clara VTA City Cores, Corridors & Station Areas Priority Development Area (PDA) and a Transit Priority Area (TPA). The project site is on Stevens Creek Boulevard, which is a high transit corridor, and within a quarter mile walking distance from the VTA Bus Routes 23, 25, 51, 55, and Rapid 523, which are considered major transit stops. 2.3 LAND USE AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS The project site is assigned Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 326-32-050, 326-32-051, 326-32- 052, and 326-32-053. While the City was in the process of obtaining certification of its 2023- 2031 Housing Element from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), the developer submitted a preliminary application pursuant to the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, commonly referred to by its legislative number, Senate Bill (SB) 330. This act vests the standards that are in place at the time a “preliminary application” for a housing 311 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 311 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4 PlaceWorks project is submitted and prevents jurisdictions from imposing or enforcing new design standards on housing projects that are not objective. As such, the proposed project is subject to the regulations in place at the time the project’s preliminary application was submitted, on April 1, 2024, which are: ▪ General Plan Land Use. Commercial/Office/Residential General Plan within the Heart of the City Special Area (HOC). ▪ Specific Plan. Heart of the City Specific Plan. ▪ Zoning District. Planned Development with General Commercial Residential (P(CG, Res)) within the Heart of the City Specific Plan, North Crossroads Area. ▪ Density. 25 dwelling units per acre (maximum). ▪ Height. 45 feet for HOC P(CG, Res). Pursuant to the State Density Bonus Law and the City’s Density Bonus ordinance (Cupertino Municipal Code [CMC] Chapter 19.56, Density Bonus), the project applicant has requested the following, to the extent needed to comply with applicable objective standards: ▪ A waiver or reduction of development standards to reduce the front, side, and rear setbacks for portions of the project. ▪ A waiver or reduction of development standards of private open space pursuant to CMC Section 19.36.070(D). ▪ A waiver from HOC Section 1.01.030(A)(1) and General Plan Figure LU-2 45-foot height maximum. ▪ A waiver from CMC Table 19.36.060(C) requiring a 70-foot minimum lot width at the front building line. ▪ A waiver from Lot Coverage under previous CMC Table 19.36.070(A), pursuant to the project vesting date. ▪ A waiver from minimum 20 foot by 20 foot interior garage parking space requirement from private garages found in CMC Table 19.124.040(A). ▪ A waiver from CMC Section 19.124 vehicle parking standards pursuant to Government Code Section 65915(p). 2.4 PROPOSED PROJECT The project applicant, Harvest Properties, Inc., is proposing a residential development that would involve the demolition of the existing office and commercial buildings and the construction of 66 new single-family homes and 56 townhomes in 7 eight-plex structures. The proposed project would include 122 units with a total of 351,338 gross square feet. 312 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 312 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION DECEMBER 2025 5 The single-family homes would have three stories and range in size from 2,328 to 2,668 square feet, with private front yards, second-floor decks, rooftop decks, and two-car garages. The townhomes would have three stories and range in size from 1,380 to 2,269 square feet, with second-floor decks and two-car garages. The proposed project would provide a total of 31,711 square feet of private open space for an average of 260 square feet per unit. Each building would be on average 42 feet tall at the highest point as measured from the finished floor. The proposed project would provide 272 on-site vehicle parking spaces, with each unit ’s 2-car garage and 28 additional guest spaces. 313 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 313 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 6 PlaceWorks This page is intentionally left blank. 314 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 314 of 2882 DECEMBER 2025 7 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION 3.1 PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21080.66 Assembly Bill (AB) 130, signed into law on June 30, 2025, and codified in Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21080.66, exempts qualifying infill housing development from CEQA review, creating a new statutory exemption. This exemption applies to any required permits, entitlements, or other discretionary approvals for a broad range of housing types. This section demonstrates that the proposed project meets the requirements of PRC Section 21080.66 and is organized as follows: ▪ Infill Requirements. This section describes the project’s consistency with the allowed housing development type defined in PRC Section 21080.66(a), subdivisions (1) through (5) and (8). ▪ Environmental Criteria. This section describes the individual environmental requirements pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(a), subdivisions (6) and (7). ▪ Tribal Cultural Resources. This section describes the tribal notification and outreach requirements pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(b). ▪ Environmental Assessment (Hazardous Materials). This section describes the requirements for the identification and treatment of hazardous materials pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(c). ▪ Other Requirements. This section describes the Labor Code requirements and eligibility of a housing development project for a density bonus, incentives or concessions, waivers or reductions of development standards, and reduced parking ratios pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(d) and (e), respectively. 3.2 ANALYSIS IN SUPPORT OF FINDINGS Infill Requirements Table 1, Infill Requirements and Project Consistency, demonstrates that the project meets the requirements of PRC Section 21080.66(a), which specifically defines a “housing development project” in Government Code Sections 65905.5(b) and 65589.5(h)(2). 315 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 315 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION 8 PlaceWorks Table 1 Infill Requirements and Project Consistency Infill Requirements Consistency Determination PRC Section 21080.66(a). Use Type. The project meets the definition of a “housing development project” pursuant to Government Code Sections 65905.5(b) and 65589.5(h)(2). The project meets any of the following criteria for a housing development: ▪ Residential units only ▪ Mixed-use development which includes residential and non-residential uses that meet any of the following criteria: o At least two-thirds of the project's new or converted square footage is designated for residential use o At least 50 percent of the project's new or converted square footage is designated for residential use and the project meets both of the following: - The project includes at least 500 net new residential units - No portion of the project is designated for use as a hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging1 o At least 50 percent of the net new or converted square footage is designated for residential use and the project meets all of the following: - The project includes at least 500 net new residential units - The project includes the demolition or conversion of at least 100,000 square feet of non-residential use - The project includes the demolition of at least 50 percent of the existing non-residential uses on the site - No portion of the project is designated for transient lodging, except a portion of the project may be designated for use as a residential hotel (as described above) ▪ Transitional housing or supportive housing; or ▪ Farmworker housing, as defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 50199.7(h) Consistent. The proposed project includes the construction of 122 residential units only. 316 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 316 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION DECEMBER 2025 9 Table 1 Infill Requirements and Project Consistency Infill Requirements Consistency Determination PRC Section 21080.66(a)(1): Size. A project site does not exceed 20 acres or four acres for a builder’s remedy project as defined in Government Code Section 65589.5(h)(11), or a housing development project or emergency shelter that meets the criteria in Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(5) as it read before January 1, 2025. Consistent. The project site is 6.93 acres. PRC Section 21080.66(a)(2): Location. The project site is within the boundaries of an incorporated municipality or an urban area, as defined by the United States Census Bureau. Based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s criteria for urban areas, an area must encompass at least 5,000 people or at least 2,000 housing units to be considered an urban area. In addition, an area must have 425 housing units per square mile, which defines the initial urban core. Two hundred (200) units per square mile shall fill in the remainder of the urban area. Each urban area shall contain at least one high-density nucleus, with 1,275 housing units per square mile.2 Consistent. The site is within the city of Cupertino, an incorporated city. PRC Section 21080.66(a)(3): Urban Development. The project site meets any of the following criteria: ▪ The site has been previously developed with an urban use; ▪ At least 75 percent of the perimeter of the site adjoins parcels developed with urban uses; ▪ At least 75 percent of the area within a one-quarter mile radius of the site is developed with urban uses; ▪ At least three sides of the site are developed with urban uses and at least two-thirds of the site’s perimeter adjoins parcels that are developed with urban uses (for sites with four sides) Consistent. The project site is developed with existing commercial buildings and a paved surface parking lot. The site is surrounded by urban uses and paved public streets, including commercial and residential uses that adjoin the northern, eastern, and western boundaries of the site, and Stevens Creek Boulevard, which adjoins the southern boundary of the site. In addition, surrounding land uses within one-quarter mile of the site are developed with urban uses. 317 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 317 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION 10 PlaceWorks Table 1 Infill Requirements and Project Consistency Infill Requirements Consistency Determination PRC Section 21080.66(a)(4): General Plan or Zoning Consistency. The project is consistent with the applicable general plan or zoning ordinance, and any local coastal program as applicable. If the zoning and general plan are not consistent with one another, the project would satisfy this requirement if it were consistent with one. The approval of a density bonus, incentives or concessions, waivers or reductions of development standards, and reduced parking ratios shall not be the basis for determining that the project is inconsistent with this requirement. Consistent. The project site is within the General Plan Heart of the City Special Area and the General Plan land use designation is Commercial/Office/Residential. The zoning district is Planned Development with General Commercial and Residential (P(CG, Res)). The General Plan land use designation allows residential development and an established residential density of up to 25 dwelling units per acre. The Heart of the City Specific Plan, which is consistent with the General Plan assumptions for the site, includes residential as a supporting use and allows for fully residential development through the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. In addition, the project site’s zoning district allows for residential development on the property. The proposed project would provide a residential density of 17.6 dwelling units per acre, which is within the density allowed for the project site under the General Plan. The proposed maximum building height of 42 feet is consistent with the General Plan’s 45-foot height limit allowed for the site. PRC Section 21080.66(a)(5): Density. The project will be at least one-half of the following applicable density specified in Government Code Section 65583.2(c)(3)(B), to accommodate housing for lower income households3 ▪ At least 15 units per acre allowed for sites within an incorporated city within a non-metropolitan county and for a non-metropolitan county that has a micropolitan area ▪ At least 10 units per acre allowed for sites within an unincorporated area in a non-metropolitan county not included in the above requirement ▪ At least 20 units per acre allowed for sites within suburban jurisdictions ▪ At least 30 units per acre allowed for sites within a jurisdiction in a metropolitan county. Consistent. The project site is in a metropolitan county (i.e., Santa Clara County). Therefore, the minimum density requirement under PRC Section 21080.66(a)(5) is at least one-half of 30 dwelling units per acre. The project would have a residential density of 17.6 dwelling units per acre. 318 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 318 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION DECEMBER 2025 11 Table 1 Infill Requirements and Project Consistency Infill Requirements Consistency Determination PRC Section 21080.66(a)(8): Lodging Uses. For a project that was deemed complete pursuant Government Code Section 65589.5(h)(5) on or after January 1, 2025, no portion of the project is designated for use as a hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging. For the purposes of this section, “other transient lodging” does not include either of the following: ▪ A residential hotel, as defined in Section 50519 of the Health and Safety Code. ▪ After the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, a resident’s use or marketing of a unit as short-term lodging, as defined in Section 17568.8 of the Business and Professions Code, in a manner consistent with local law. Consistent. The proposed project would not include hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging uses. Notes: 1 For a project that was deemed complete pursuant to Government Code Section 65589.5(h)(5) on or after January 1, 2025, no port ion of the project is designated for use as a hotel, motel, bed and breakfast inn, or other transient lodging. Other transient lodging does not include either of the following: a residential hotel, as defined in Section 50519 of the Health and Safety Code, or a resident’s use or marketing of a unit as short-term lodging, as defined in Section 17568.8 of the Business and Professions Code. 2 United States Census Bureau, 2025, July 11 (accessed), Redefining Urban Areas following the 2020 Census, https://www.census.gov/newsroom/blogs/random- samplings/2022/12/redefining-urban-areas-following-2020-census.html. 3 California Legislative Information, 2025, July 11 (accessed), Government Code – GOV: ARTICLE 10.6. Housing Elements [65580 - 65589.11], https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=65583.2.&nodeTreePath=12.1.10.10&lawCode=GOV. 319 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 319 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION DECEMBER 2025 12 Environmental Criteria Pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(a), the project site must meet the environmental criteria identified in Government Code Section 65913.4(a)(6). These environmental criteria and the proposed project’s consistency are detailed in Table 2, Environmental Criteria and Project Consistency. As shown in Table 2, the project site would meet the environmental criteria. Table 2 Environmental Criteria and Project Consistency Environmental Criteria Consistency Determination PRC Section 21080.66(a)(6) Coastal Zone. The project site cannot be located in a coastal zone, as defined in the Public Resources Code (PRC) Division 20. Consistent. The project site is not in a coastal zone. It is approximately 20 miles east of the Pacific Ocean. The California Coastal Commission designates the boundary of coastal zones to extend 3 nautical miles offshore and does not include the project site.1 Farmland. The project site cannot be located on either prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance, as defined pursuant to United States Department of Agriculture land inventory and monitoring criteria, as modified for California, and designated on the maps prepared by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the Department of Conservation, or land zoned or designated for agricultural protection or preservation by a local ballot measure that was approved by the voters of that jurisdiction. Consistent. The project site is not on prime farmland or farmland of statewide importance. The California Department of Conservation designates the city of Cupertino as Urban and Built-Up Land.2 Additionally, as discussed in Section 2.3, Land Use and Zoning Designations, the project site is not zoned for agricultural uses. Wetlands. The project site cannot be located on wetlands, as defined in the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Manual, Part 660 FW 2. Consistent. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service does not identify any wetlands on or near the project site.3 Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The project site cannot be within a very high fire hazard severity zone (FHSZ), as determined by the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) pursuant to Government Code Section 51178, or within a high or very high FHSZ as indicated on maps adopted by CAL FIRE pursuant to PRC Section 4202. This requirement does not apply to sites that have adopted fire hazard mitigation measures pursuant to existing building standards or state fire Consistent. The project site is not within a very high FHSZ as designated by CAL FIRE. It is approximately 1.5 miles northeast of a very high FHSZ in a Local Responsibility Area, and 2.5 miles northeast of lands that CAL FIRE designates as a very high FHSZ in a State Responsibility Area.4 320 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 320 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION DECEMBER 2025 13 Table 2 Environmental Criteria and Project Consistency Environmental Criteria Consistency Determination mitigation measures applicable to the development. Hazardous Waste Site. The project site cannot be on a hazardous waste site that is listed pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 (Cortese List) or a hazardous waste site designated by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 25356 (EnviroStor online database), unless DTSC has cleared the site for residential use or residential mixed uses. Consistent. The project site is not included on the Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese) pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.5 Additionally, the project site is not listed on any of the following California Environmental Protection Agency’s (CalEPA) Cortese List Data Resources:6 ▪ List of Hazardous Waste and Substances sites from DTSC EnviroStor database5 ▪ List of Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) sites from the State Water Resource Control Board’s (SWRCB’s) GeoTracker7 ▪ List of solid waste disposal sites identified by SWRCB with waste constituents above hazardous waste levels outside the waste management unit8 ▪ List of “active” Cease and Desist Orders and Cleanup and Abatement Orders from SWRCB9 ▪ List of hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code, identified by DTSC10 Earthquake Fault Zone. The project site cannot be within a delineated earthquake fault zone as determined by the State Geologist in any official maps published by the State Geologist, unless the development complies with applicable seismic protection building code standards adopted by the California Building Standards Commission under the California Building Standards Law of Health and Safety Code Division 13, and by any local building department under Title 2 of the Government Code, Division 1, Chapter 12.2. Consistent. The California Geological Survey does not map an earthquake fault zone in or near the project site. 11 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Designations. The project site cannot be within a special flood hazard area subject to inundation by Consistent. FEMA’s Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) designates the project site as Zone X, which is defined as areas with 0.2% annual 321 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 321 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION 14 PlaceWorks Table 2 Environmental Criteria and Project Consistency Environmental Criteria Consistency Determination the 1 percent annual chance flood (100-year flood) as determined by FEMA in any official maps published by FEMA, unless either of the following are met: ▪ The site has been subject to a Letter of Map Revision prepared by FEMA and issued to the local jurisdiction. ▪ The site meets FEMA requirements necessary to meet minimum flood plain management criteria of the National Flood Insurance Program. The project site also cannot be within a regulatory floodway as determined by FEMA in any official maps published by FEMA, unless the development has received a no-rise certification in accordance with Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 60.3(d)(3). chance of flood. The project site is also not within a regulatory floodway.12 Conservation Plan. The project site cannot be on lands identified for conservation in an adopted natural community conservation plan pursuant to the Natural Community Conservation Planning Act, habitat conservation plan pursuant to the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, or other adopted natural resource protection plan. Consistent. The Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan boundaries covers a small portion of Cupertino; however, the project site is approximately 0.8 miles north of the boundaries of the plan.13 Special Status Species Habitat. The project site cannot be located in a habitat for protected species identified as candidate, sensitive, or species of special status by state or federal agencies, fully protected species, or species protected by the federal Endangered Species Act of 1973, the California Endangered Species Act, or the Native Plant Protection Act. Consistent. The Classification and Assessment with Landsat of Visible Ecological Groupings habitat mapping program classifies the project site as an “urban area,” which tends 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. The California Natural Diversity Database has no record of special-status plant and animal species on the project site or urbanized areas within a one-mile area surrounding the site.14 There are no natural lands within a one-mile area of the project site. Accordingly, the 322 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 322 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION DECEMBER 2025 15 Table 2 Environmental Criteria and Project Consistency Environmental Criteria Consistency Determination project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species. Lands under Conservation Easement. The project site cannot be on lands under conservation easement. Consistent. The project site is not within a conservation easement. PRC Section 21080.66(a)(7), Historic Structure. Pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(a)(7), the project cannot require the demolition of historic structure that was placed on a national, state, or local historic register before the date a preliminary application was submitted for the project. Consistent. The project would include the demolition of the site’s existing commercial building. The existing building on the project site is not currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places15 or the list of California Register of Historical Resources,16 or the most recent list of Cupertino historically significant resources.17 Sources: 1. California Coastal Commission, 2019, Maps: Coastal Zone Boundary, https://www.coastal.ca.gov/maps/czb/, accessed November 11, 2025. 2. California Department of Conservation, 2022, California Important Farmland Finder, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/, accessed November 11, 2025. 3. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, 2025, November 11 (accessed), https://fwsprimary.wim.usgs.gov/wetlands/apps/wetlands-mapper/. 4. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, 2025, November 11 (accessed), Fire Hazard Severity Zone Viewer, https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/6a9cb66bb1824cd98756812af41292a0. 5. California Department of Toxic Substances Control, 2025, November 11 (accessed), Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese), https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search?cmd=search&reporttype=CORTESE&site_type=CSITES,FUDS &status=ACT,BKLG,COM&reporttitle=HAZARDOUS+WASTE+AND+SUBSTANCES+SITE+LIST+%28CORTESE%29. 6. California Environmental Protection Agency, 2025, November 11 (accessed), Cortese List Data Resources, https://calepa.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/CorteseList/. 7. State Water Resources Control Board, 2025, November 11 (accessed), GeoTracker, https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/search?CMD=search&case_number=&business_name=&main_street_n ame=&city=&zip=&county=&SITE_TYPE=LUFT&oilfield=&STATUS=&BRANCH=&MASTER_BASE=&Search=Search . 8. California Environmental Protection Agency, 2025, November 11 (accessed), Sites Identified with Waste Constituents Above Hazardous waste Levels Outside the Waste Management Unit, https://calepa.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/2016/10/SiteCleanup-CorteseList-CurrentList.pdf. 9. California Environmental Protection Agency, 2025, November 11 (accessed), List of “active” CDO and CAO from Water Board, https://calepa.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/SiteCleanup-CorteseList-CDOCAOList.xlsx. 10. California Environmental Protection Agency, 2025, September 3 (accessed), Cortese List: Section 65962.5(a), https://calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/section-65962-5a/. 323 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 323 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION 16 PlaceWorks 11. California Geological Survey, 2025, November 11 (accessed), Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/eqzapp/. 12. Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2009, May 18, FEMA Flood Map Service Center: Search By Address, https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=10065%20E%20Estates%20Dr%2C%20Cupertino%2C%20C A%2095014, accessed November 11, 2025. 13. Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency, 2013, Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan Geobrowser, https://scvha.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=f2268679c2fa49489e3f7d6e8377837e, accessed November 11, 2025. 14. California Natural Diversity Database, 2025, September 3 (accessed), CNDDB Maps and Data, https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps-and-Data. 15. National Park Service, 2024, July 10, National Register of Historic Places, https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/database-research.htm#table, accessed November 11, 2025. 16. California Office of Historic Preservation, 2025, September 3 (accessed), California Historical Resources, https://ohp.parks.ca.gov/ListedResources/?view=county&criteria=43. 17. City of Cupertino, 2015, certified General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and Associated Rezoning EIR, Chapter 4.5, Cultural Resources, Table 4.4-2, Cultural Resources in the Project Study Area and Vicinity, pages 4.4-8 to 4.4-12. Tribal Cultural Resources TRIBAL OUTREACH AND CONSULTATION PRC Section 21080.66(b) requires local government to provide formal notification via certified mail and email to each California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project site as an invitation to consult on the proposed project, its location, and the potential for the project to impact tribal cultural resources pursuant to one of the following deadlines: ▪ Within 14 days of the application for the project being deemed complete pursuant to Government Code Section 65589.5(h)(5). ▪ Within 14 days of notifying the local government that the project is eligible to be exempt from this division pursuant to this section for projects whose applications were deemed complete before July 1, 2026. Tribal Notification The City received a request to be notified about projects in the city of Cupertino from the Tamien Nation on May 28, 2021, as the city is within the geographic area with which they are traditionally and culturally affiliated. The City routinely notifies the Tamien Nation of all applicable projects pursuant to the Native American Historic Resource Protection Act, commonly referred to as it’s legislative bill number AB 52. In addition, the City sent a request to the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for a Tribal Contacts List on August 4, 2025. 324 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 324 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION DECEMBER 2025 17 The NAHC provided a consultation list with a total of 23 contacts for 9 tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the city of Cupertino on August 5, 2025, as listed. ▪ Amah Mutsun Tribal Band ▪ Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the SF Bay Area ▪ Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista ▪ Northern Valley Yokut / Ohlone Tribe ▪ Tamien Nation ▪ Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe ▪ The Ohlone Indian Tribe ▪ Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan ▪ Wuksachi Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band On August 14, 2025, the City sent outreach request letters via certified mail and email for each tribal contact provided. Table 3, Tribal Notification, Outreach, and Consultation Initiation, shows the contacts that requested consultation. Table 3 Tribal Notification, Outreach, and Consultation Initiation Tribe Name Tribe Contact Date of Response Date of Consultation Initiation Amah Mutsun Tribal Band Ed Ketchum, Vice-Chairperson -- -- Amah Mutsun Tribal Band Valentin Lopez, Chairperson -- -- Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista Garry Zimmer, Senior Cultural Monitor and Consultant -- -- Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista Christopher Zimmer, Senior Cultural Monitor and Consultant, Councilman -- -- Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista Michelle Zimmer, Senior Cultural Monitor and Consultant -- -- Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista Irenne Zwierlein, Chairperson -- -- Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista Shelby Brown, Senior Cultural Monitor and Consultant, Councilwoman -- -- Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe Carla Munoz, Tribal Council -- -- Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe Samuel Rodriguez, Cultural Resource Officer -- -- 325 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 325 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION 18 PlaceWorks Table 3 Tribal Notification, Outreach, and Consultation Initiation Tribe Name Tribe Contact Date of Response Date of Consultation Initiation Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe Henry Muñoz, Cultural Resource Officer -- -- Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan Ann Marie Sayers, Retired Honorable Elder -- -- Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan Kanyon Sayers-Roods, Tribal Chairwoman 8/15/2025 8/28/2025 Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the SF Bay Area Richard Massiatt, Councilmember/MLD Tribal Rep. -- -- Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the SF Bay Area Charlene Nijmeh, Chairperson -- -- Northern Valley Yokut / Ohlone Tribe Katherine Perez, Chairperson -- -- Northern Valley Yokut / Ohlone Tribe Timothy Perez, Tribal Compliance Officer -- -- Tamien Nation Lillian Camarena, Secretary 9/10/2025 9/24/2025 Tamien Nation Quirina Geary, Chairperson 9/10/2025 9/24/2025 Tamien Nation Johnathan Wasaka Costillas, THPO -- -- The Ohlone Indian Tribe Desiree Vigil, THPO -- -- The Ohlone Indian Tribe Andrew Galvan, Chairperson -- -- The Ohlone Indian Tribe Vincent Medina, Cultural Leader -- -- Wuksachi Indian Tribe/ Eshom Valley Band Kenneth Woodrow, Chairperson -- -- Source: Native American Heritage Commission, August 2025. Note. Where no dates are identified, no response was received so consultation was not initiated. Sacred Lands File Search Concurrently with the tribal contact list request on August 4, 2025, the City also requested a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search. There are no known cultural resources on the project site and the results of the SLF search conducted by Mathew Lin, MPP, Cultural Resources Analyst, of the NAHC, on August 5, 2025, were negative. 326 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 326 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION DECEMBER 2025 19 PROTECTION OF TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES Pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(b)(4)(A), the project applicant is required to comply with any enforceable agreements reached during the project consultation. Because no agreements, enforceable or otherwise, were requested during project consultation, no requirements were added to the proposed project. Further, pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(b)(4)(B), a mutual agreement between the California Native American tribes that consulted, and the project applicant was made; thus, none of the measures pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(b)(4)(B) are required. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES CONSISTENCY SUMMARY The City completed the tribal outreach requirements pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(b)(1) through (3) and the requirements of PRC Section 21080.66(b)(4) do not need to be included as a binding condition. As such, the project is consistent with the tribal outreach and consultation and protection of tribal cultural resources requirements described in PRC Section 21080.66(b). Environmental Assessment (Hazardous Materials) PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT PRC Section 21080.66(c)(1)(A) states that local government shall require the project applicant to complete a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) as a condition of approval for the development, as defined in Section 78090 of the Health and Safety Code. Based on PRC Section 21080.66(c)(1)(B), if a recognized environmental condition (REC) is found, the project applicant shall complete a preliminary endangerment assessment1 (in accordance with the California Health and Safety Code Section 78095), prepared by an environmental assessor to determine the existence of any release of a hazardous substance on the site and to determine the potential for exposure of future occupants to significant health hazards from any nearby property or activity. Pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(c)(1)(C), if a release of a hazardous substance is found to exist on the site, the release shall be removed, or any effects of the release shall be mitigated to levels required by current federal and State statutory and regulatory standards before the local government issues a certificate of occupancy. Pursuant to PRC Section 21080.66(c)(1)(D), if a potential for exposure to significant hazards from surrounding properties or activities is found to exist, the effects of the potential exposure shall 1 Based on the California Health and Safety Code Section 78095, preliminary endangerment assessment includes the following activities: Sampling and analysis of a site; A preliminary determination of the type and extent of hazardous material contamination of a site; and A preliminary evaluation of the risks the hazardous materials contamination of a site may pose to public health or the environment. 327 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 327 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION 20 PlaceWorks be mitigated to levels required by current federal and State statutory and regulatory standards before the local government issues a certificate of occupancy. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS CONSISTENCY REQUIRMENTS A Phase I ESA was prepared and third-party peer reviewed as part of the City’s requirements in Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 17.04, Standard Environmental Protection Requirements, that identifies standard environmental protection requirements that all construction projects must meet. The results of the Phase I ESA did not find any RECs. Accordingly, the project is consistent with the PRC Section 21080.66(c)(1) criteria regarding hazardous materials. PROXIMITY TO FREEWAYS For projects within 500 feet of a freeway, PRC Section 21080.66(c)(2) requires: ▪ The building shall have a centralized heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) system. ▪ The outdoor air intakes for the HVAC system shall face away from the freeway. ▪ The building shall provide air filtration media for outside and return air that provides a minimum efficiency reporting value of 16. ▪ The air filtration media shall be replaced at the manufacturer’s designated interval. ▪ The building shall not have any balconies facing the freeway Project Consistency. The project site is approximately 0.5 miles (2,700 feet) away from the freeway; therefore, the proposed project is not subject to PRC Section 21080.66(c)(2) criteria. Other Requirements LABOR CODE PRC Section 21080.66(d) includes additional labor requirements for housing development projects, including: ▪ The payment of at least the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for the type of work and geographic area, as determined by the Director of Industrial Relations, to construction workers employed in the execution of a 100 percent affordable housing development project. ▪ Compliance with the labor standards outlined in Government Code Section 65913.4(a)(8) for buildings over 85 feet in height above grade. 328 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 328 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION DECEMBER 2025 21 ▪ Compliance with the labor standards of Government Code Section 65912.130 for projects of 50 units or greater in the city and county of San Francisco, for any construction craft where at least 50 percent of the units in market-rate multifamily housing projects that received their certificate of occupancy between 2022 and 2024, inclusive, were built by workers that were paid not less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages. ▪ Extension of Labor Code Section 218.8 to the project applicant in addition to the direct contractor or subcontractor. ▪ Allowance of a joint labor-management cooperation committee to undertake specific actions to court. Project Consistency. The proposed project is not a 100 percent affordable housing development, over 85 feet in height above grade, or in the city or county of San Francsico. The proposed project would comply with the Labor Code and the Business and Professions Code described previously. ELIGIBILITY FOR MODIFICATIONS OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS As stated in PRC Section 21080.66(e), this PRC section does not affect the eligibility of a housing development project for a density bonus, incentives or concessions, waivers or reductions of development standards, and reduced parking ratios pursuant to Government Code Section 65915. Therefore, the applicability of this statutory exemption does not prohibit the proposed project from requesting the waivers, exception, and reduction described in Section 2.3, Land Use and Zoning Designations. 3.3 CONCLUSION As analyzed in Section 3.1, Public Resources Code Section 21080.66, the proposed project meets the criteria for statutory exemption. Accordingly, this document finds that a Notice of Exemption is appropriate for the proposed project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15062. 329 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 329 of 2882 20883 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CEQA EXEMPTION MEMORANDUM CITY OF CUPERTINO 3. FINDINGS CONCERNING CEQA EXEMPTION 22 PlaceWorks This page is intentionally left blank. 330 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 330 of 2882 PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California Prepared for: Harvest Properties, Inc. 180 Grand Avenue, Suite 1400 Oakland, California 94612 Prepared by: Langan CA, Inc 1 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 590 San Jose, California 95113 Daniel Wood, PG Project Geologist Peter J Cusack Associate Principal Report Date: 11 June 2025 180-Day Viability Date: 1 October 2025 770709101 331 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 331 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 4 1.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................... 4 1.2 Scope of Services ............................................................................................... 4 1.2.1 Records Review and Local Government Interviews ............................ 5 1.2.2 Site Reconnaissance and Owner/Operator/Occupant Interviews ...... 5 1.2.3 Evaluation, Report and Parts Used in Concert ..................................... 6 1.2.4 Non-ASTM Scope Services .................................................................... 6 1.3 User Responsibilities .......................................................................................... 6 1.4 Limiting Conditions/Deviations ......................................................................... 7 1.5 Data Gaps ............................................................................................................ 7 2.0 SUBJECT PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND CURRENT USE ......................................... 7 2.1 Location, Legal Description, and Ownership .................................................... 7 2.2 Physical Setting .................................................................................................. 8 2.2.1 Topography ............................................................................................ 8 2.2.2 Geology ................................................................................................... 8 2.2.3 Hydrogeology ......................................................................................... 8 2.3 Subject Property Description ............................................................................. 9 2.4 Current Subject Property Use ............................................................................ 9 2.5 Hazardous Substances and Petroleum Products ........................................... 11 2.5.1 Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) ................................................... 11 2.5.2 Aboveground Storage Tanks (ASTs) .................................................. 11 2.5.3 Drums, Totes, and Intermediate Bulk Containers .............................. 11 2.5.4 Other Chemical Storage, Containers, or Equipment ......................... 11 2.6 Air Emissions .................................................................................................... 12 2.7 Waste Management ......................................................................................... 12 2.7.1 Hazardous Waste ................................................................................. 12 2.7.2 Non-Hazardous Waste ......................................................................... 13 2.7.3 Fill Areas or Solid Waste ...................................................................... 13 2.8 Wastewater ....................................................................................................... 13 2.9 Storm Water ..................................................................................................... 13 3.0 SUBJECT PROPERTY HISTORY AND RECORDS REVIEW ......................................... 13 3.1 Historical Summary .......................................................................................... 14 3.2 Regulatory Database Review ........................................................................... 15 3.3 Prior Report Review ......................................................................................... 17 4.0 ADJOINING PROPERTIES AND SURROUNDING AREA ............................................ 18 4.1 Current Use of Adjoining Properties and Surrounding Area ......................... 18 4.2 Adjoining Properties and Surrounding Area History ..................................... 19 4.3 Regulatory Database Review ........................................................................... 21 4.3.1 Adjoining Properties ............................................................................ 21 4.3.2 Surrounding Area ................................................................................. 22 5.0 CONCLUSIONS, FINDINGS AND OPINIONS .............................................................. 23 332 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 332 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page ii 6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONAL STATEMENT .................................................... 25 7.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 26 8.0 LIMITATIONS AND DEFINITIONS ............................................................................... 27 8.1 ASTM Definitions ............................................................................................. 28 8.2 Standard Environmental Record Sources ....................................................... 31 TABLES APPENDICES 770709101.02 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report_20807, 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd_Cupertino 333 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 333 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page iii ATTACHMENTS TABLES Table ES-1 Conclusions, Findings and Opinions Table 2-1 Current Occupants/Tenants Table 2-2 Utility Providers Table 3-1 Subject Property History Table 4-1 Current Use of Adjoining Properties and Surrounding Area Table 4-2 Historical Use of Adjoining Properties Table 5-1 Conclusions, Findings and Opinions Table 6-1 Dates of Assessment Components APPENDICES Appendix A Figure 1 - Subject Property Location Map Figure 2 - Subject Property Layout Figure 3 - Nearby Properties Map Appendix B Agency Records and Other Reports Appendix C Site Reconnaissance Checklist and Photographs Appendix D User Provided Information Appendix E Historical Resources Appendix F Environmental Database Report Appendix G Resumes of Environmental Professionals 334 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 334 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Langan CA, Inc. (Langan) completed this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the property located at 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard in Cupertino, Santa Clara County, California (the “subject property”) under the authorization of Harvest Properties, Inc. (Harvest, “Client” and the “user”). The Phase I ESA was completed following the guidelines of ASTM International Standard Practice E1527-21 (ASTM E1527-21), the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (U.S. EPA) All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) Rule, and industry standard practice. The user requested this ESA as part of their environmental due diligence related to a potential transaction involving the subject property. Subject Property Layout The subject property is approximately 6.99 acres and is generally rectangular. The subject property consists of six one- and two-story commercial buildings with associated driveways, parking, and landscaping areas. The subject property is identified by assessor’s parcel numbers (APNs) 326-32-053, 326-32-050, 326-32-052, and 326-32-051. Subject Property Current Use The subject property is developed and consists of six one- and two-story commercial buildings with associated driveways, parking, and landscaping areas. The southeast corner of the subject property is developed with a one-story retail space (Building 20807). North of Building 20807 along the eastern boundary of the subject property is a two-story office building with subgrade parking (Building 20813) followed by a one-story garden-style office cluster (Building 20823) consisting of four wings connected by inner courtyards and walking paths. The northeast corner of the subject property is developed with a two-story office building (Building 20833). The southwest corner of the subject property is developed with a two-story office building with subgrade parking (Building 20883). The northeast of the subject property is developed with a one-story garden-style office cluster (Building 20823) consisting of five wings connected by inner courtyards and walking paths. Subject Property History The subject property was used as agricultural land and rural residences between 1939 and 1968. By the early 1970s, the crops and rural residences were removed and the existing buildings at 20823 and 20863 Stevens Creek Boulevard and associated asphalt parking were constructed, 335 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 335 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 2 and an additional commercial building and associated asphalt parking was constructed on the southeast corner of the subject property. By the early 1980s, the existing building located at 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard was constructed in the southwest corner of the subject property. By the early 1990s, the existing building located at 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard was constructed in the northeast corner of the subject property. By 2006, the existing building located at 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard was constructed in the southeast corner of the subject property. Adjoining Properties and Surrounding Area The adjoining properties and surrounding area consisted of agricultural land and rural residences until the early 1960s. By the late 1930s, Stevens Creek Boulevard was apparent. By the mid-1950s, residential homes and a portion of Alves Drive were constructed to the northwest of the subject property. By the early 1960s, Saich Way was constructed to the east of the subject property and commercial structures and associated asphalt parking were constructed to the east, south, and west of the subject property, and additional residential homes were constructed to the northeast of the subject property. By the late 1960s, a residential home was constructed to the west of the subject property. By the mid-1970s, Alves Drive was extended across the northern border of the subject property and additional commercial buildings were constructed to the west, and additional residential housing and a hexagonal shaped building were constructed to the north of the subject property. The adjoining and surrounding properties have consisted primarily of commercial business and neighborhoods from the mid-1970s to present. Conclusions Langan completed a Phase I ESA of the subject property using the scope guidelines and inherent limitations of ASTM E1527-21. Table ES-1 presents the conclusions of the Phase I ESA. 336 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 336 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 3 TABLE ES-1 Conclusions, Findings and Opinions ASTM E1527-21 Scope Items Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) Langan did not identify any RECs. Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions (CRECs) Langan did not identify CRECs. Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions (HRECs) Langan did not identify any HRECs De Minimis Conditions Langan did not observe any de minimis conditions. Significant Data Gaps Langan did not identify any significant data gaps. Non-ASTM E1527-21 Scope Items Business Environmental Risks (BERs) The following BERs were identified in association with the site: Aerial photographs show the site was a part of larger agricultural fields from 1939 through at least 1960 on which agricultural chemicals such as pesticides, herbicides, and heavy metals may have been applied . Based on this history, it is possible that pesticide and herbicide compounds and heavy metals are present in shallow soil beneath the site. Based on the age of the buildings on-site, it is possible that asbestos and/or lead-based paint were used in building materials. Prior to any demolition activities, an asbestos, lead-based paint, and universal waste survey should be conducted. 337 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 337 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 4 PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 1.0 INTRODUCTION Langan CA, Inc. (Langan) completed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the property located at 20807 and 20813–20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Santa Clara County, Cupertino, California (the “subject property”) under the authorization of Harvest Properties, Inc. (Harvest, “Client” and the “user”). A Subject Property Location Map is provided in Appendix A (Figure 1). The Phase I ESA was completed following the guidelines of ASTM International Standard Practice E1527-21 (ASTM E1527-21), the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (U.S. EPA) All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) Rule, and industry standard practice. The user requested this ESA as part of their environmental due diligence related to a potential transaction involving the subject property. 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this Phase I ESA is to identify recognized environmental conditions (REC) associated with the subject property. This purpose also includes identifying controlled recognized environmental conditions (CREC), historical recognized environmental conditions (HREC), de minimis conditions, and significant data gaps. The definitions of REC, CREC, HREC, de minimis condition and other select ASTM terms used in this report are in Section 8. 1.2 Scope of Services Langan’s scope of services consisted of the completion of a Phase I ESA following the guidelines of ASTM E1527-21. Langan’s scope of services as it pertains to the elements of a Phase I ESA as specified in ASTM E1527-21 is described below. On 8 July 2024, the US EPA final rule designating two per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) – perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) including their salts and structural isomers – as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) became effective. Because of the complex and varied historical use of PFAS in various industries; limited prior disclosures of PFAS content on product specification sheets, Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), and Safety Data Sheets (SDS); the complex chemistry and chemical transformations associated with some PFAS; and 338 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 338 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 5 the ever-growing and varied list of state regulations, it is not feasible to evaluate PFOA and PFOS without also considering other PFAS. As such, absent analytical data, Langan incorporated a review of PFAS as a general class into this Phase I ESA. PFAS and other CERCLA hazardous substances and petroleum products have been detected in background environmental samples across the globe, including in areas removed from specific recognized sources. This Phase I ESA was not intended to evaluate background concentrations of CERCLA hazardous substances or petroleum products, regardless of whether the source is naturally occurring or anthropogenic. The objective of Langan’s scope of services was to identify the presence, likely presence, and/or material threat of a release of CERCLA hazardous substances and petroleum products related to specific property uses that are generally recognized as known or potential sources of such substances and products. 1.2.1 Records Review and Local Government Interviews Langan contracted a third-party provider to search environmental regulatory databases and provide historical records. The database search included select federal, state, local and tribal standard source environmental databases within the approximate search radii specified by ASTM E1527-21. Langan submitted Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to supplement environmental database listing information. The FOIA requests were submitted to the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health (SCCDEH), City of Cupertino, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), and the State of California Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Langan also searched for available records on the EnviroStor and GeoTracker online databases, operated by DTSC and the SWRCB, respectively, as well as United States Geological Survey (USGS) mapping and US EPA databases. Agency FOIA-requested information, where received, is discussed in relevant sections of this report, and referenced in Section 7. Pertinent documents are provided in Appendix B. 1.2.2 Site Reconnaissance and Owner/Operator/Occupant Interviews Langan completed the site reconnaissance on 18 April 2025. Francisco Ramos (Building Engineer of Harvest Properties; the “key site manager”) and Casidy Chen (Assistant Property Manager of Harvest Properties) accompanied Daniel Wood and Wilma Wei of Langan during the site reconnaissance. Francisco Ramos has been associated with the subject property since 2018. Casidy Chen has been with the subject property since 2023. Mr. Ramous and Ms. Chen provided 339 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 339 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 6 information on current occupants and operations, site history, maintenance, and their knowledge of chemical use and hazardous waste generation at the Subject Property. Langan walked the periphery of the subject property, observed the subject property from adjoining public thoroughfares, and walked the accessible interiors of structures at the subject property. Langan observed the adjoining properties and the surrounding area from the periphery of the subject property and from public thoroughfares adjoining to or traveled on to access the subject property. The weather at the time of the site reconnaissance was approximately 60ºF and sunny. Photographs from the site reconnaissance are provided in Appendix C. Langan also interviewed Mr. Ramos by phone prior to the site reconnaissance on 16 April 2025. Ms. Casidy Chen also assisted with outstanding interview questions following the site reconnaissance on 18 April 2025. Mr. Kevin Choy of Harvest Properties also completed the site Used Questionnaire (included in Appendix D). 1.2.3 Evaluation, Report and Parts Used in Concert Langan evaluated the information obtained from the records reviews, site reconnaissance and interviews described above, and from the user as described in Section 1.3 in concert with each other. Langan’s findings, opinions, and conclusions are discussed throughout this report. Significant assumptions, or deletions, deviations, or exceptions to ASTM E1527-21 are noted in Section 1.4. 1.2.4 Non-ASTM Scope Services The scope of services for the Phase I ESA did not include non-scope ASTM considerations. 1.3 User Responsibilities Langan requested that the user provide the results of tasks the user is responsible for completing to satisfy the requirements of AAI. The tasks include: searching for known environmental liens and activity and use limitations (AULs) filed or recorded against the subject property, and provision of information related to specialized knowledge or experience of the user or the degree of obviousness relative to conditions indicative of releases or threatened releases; actual knowledge of the user regarding environmental liens or AULs related to the subject property; specialized knowledge or experience of the user; reasons for significantly lower purchase prices, and commonly known or reasonably ascertainable information within the local community about the subject property. Langan also requested that the user state the reason the Phase I ESA was 340 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 340 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 7 requested. Relevant information provided by the user is discussed in applicable sections of this report. Unless specifically included in the scope of services, Langan did not complete a title search or a search for environmental liens or AULs, as that is the responsibility of the user. The user provided a Title Report (Appendix D) and no environmental liens or AULs were identified. 1.4 Limiting Conditions/Deviations Langan was unable to access the interiors of some of the buildings at the subject property. Specifically, access was limited in Building 20833, the second floor of Building 20883, and some of the suites in Building 20823. Full access was granted in Buildings 20807, 20813, 20863, and the first floor of 20883. With the exception of Building 20833 and the second floor of Building 20883, access was granted to the electrical rooms, janitor’s closets, boiler rooms, and elevator maintenance rooms of each of the buildings. Langan did not delete or deviate from the ASTM E1527-21 guidelines during this Phase I ESA. 1.5 Data Gaps Data gaps, if encountered, are discussed throughout the report. Significant data gaps, if any, are summarized in Section 5.0. 2.0 SUBJECT PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND CURRENT USE The following sections describe the subject property location, ownership, physical setting, and current layout and operations. 2.1 Location, Legal Description, and Ownership The approximately 6.99-acre subject property is bound by Alves Drive to the north, commercial buildings and Saich Way to the east, Stevens Creek Boulevard to the south, and various commercial properties and residential homes to the west. The subject property is described by the Santa Clara County Tax Assessor by accessor parcel numbers (APNs) 326-32-053, 326-32-050, 326-32-052, and 326-32-051. A legal description of the subject property is provided on the property title report presented in Appendix D. The subject property is owned by Stevens Creek OCA Owner, LLC. 341 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 341 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 8 2.2 Physical Setting The physical setting that includes the geologic, hydrogeologic, hydrologic, and topographic characteristics of the subject property and surrounding area is discussed below. 2.2.1 Topography The 2021 United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangle topographic map for Cupertino depicts the subject property at an elevation of approximately 260 feet above mean sea level (amsl) and generally flat. The regional topography slopes downward toward the east northeast and the San Francisco Bay, which is located approximately seven miles north of the subject property. 2.2.2 Geology According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Cooperative Soil Survey Service (NCSS) Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO) data for Cupertino, soils at the subject property consist primarily of fine-grained silts and clays and coarse-grained sands with fines. According to USGS information, the subject property consists surficial sediments of alluvial sand, silt, clay, and gravel. 2.2.3 Hydrogeology Surface water bodies are not present within the boundary of the subject property. The nearest surface water bodies are the Junipero Serra Channel approximately 3,200 feet north of the subject property (measured from the northernmost subject property boundary) and the Regnart Creek approximately 3,300 feet southeast of the subject property (measured from the south easternmost subject property boundary). The San Francisco Bay is approximately seven miles to the north of the subject property. Information regarding subject property-specific groundwater flow direction is unavailable. Groundwater flow can be influenced by several factors such as surface water bodies, wetlands, hydrogeologic and anthropogenic variables. However, based on topographic gradient and proximity to the San Francisco Bay, it is expected that groundwater generally flows to the east northeast. A review of the Geocheck section of the LightBox Environmental Data Resources (EDR) Regulatory Database Report (Appendix F) and site reconnaissance observations identified no groundwater wells on the subject property. The EDR report identified ten wells within approximately 0.5-miles of the subject property. Six of the 10 wells are within 0.25 miles of the 342 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 342 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 9 subject property. Three of wells identified in the EDR report as A1, A2, and A3, (EDR Well ID: CAEDF0000071038, CAEDF0000045365, and CAEDF0000120713, respectively. Geotracker Well ID: T0608574700-MW-2, T0608574700-MW-1, and T0608574700-MW-3, respectively) are located approximately 470 feet to 520 feet to the east southeast of the subject property. The three “A” wells are associated with the 20755 Stevens Creek Blvd. property, as described in Section 4.3.2. Three of the wells identified in the EDR report as B4, B5, and B6, (EDR Well ID: CAEDF0000108296, CAEDF0000115303, and CAEDF0000108688, respectively. Geotracker Well ID: 14442-MW-2, 14442-MW-1, 14442-MW-3, respectively) are located approximately 724 feet to 776 feet west southwest of the subject property. The three “B” wells are associated with the Shell Service Station located at 20999 Stevens Creek Blvd. property, as described in Section 4.3.2. 2.3 Subject Property Description The subject property is developed and consists of six one- and two-story commercial buildings with associated driveways, parking, and landscaping areas. The southeast corner of the subject property is developed with a one-story retail space (Building 20807). North of Building 20807 along the eastern boundary of the subject property is a two-story office building with subgrade parking (Building 20813) along the eastern boundary of the subject property is a two-story office building with subgrade parking (Building 20813) followed by a one-story garden-style office cluster (Building 20823) consisting of four wings connected by inner courtyards and walking paths. The northeast corner of the subject property is developed with a two-story office building (Building 20833). The southwest corner of the subject property is developed with a two-story office building with subgrade parking (Building 20883). The northeast of the subject property is developed with a one-story garden-style office cluster (Building 20823) consisting of five wings connected by inner courtyards and walking paths. In total, the subject property is developed with approximately 118,000 square feet (sf) of commercial space. The subject property is accessible from Stevens Creek Boulevard, Saich Way, and Alves Drive. A Subject Property Layout Map is provided in Figure 2 of Appendix A. Photographs of the subject property and a checklist documenting Langan’s observations relative to the features, activities, uses, and conditions outlined in Section 9.4 of ASTM E1527-21 are in Appendix C. 2.4 Current Subject Property Use The subject property is developed and consists of six one- and two-story commercial buildings with associated driveways, parking, and landscaping areas. 343 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 343 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 10 The following table summarizes subject property occupants/tenants. TABLE 2-1 Current Occupants/Tenants Building Suite Occupant Description 20807 100 Panera Bread Restaurant 200 Voyager Craft Coffee Coffee Shop 20813 100 Apple Office Space 150 Apple Office Space 200 Mobileum, Inc Office Space 250 Ventana Micro Systems Office Space 20823 100 Apple Office Space 110 Apple Office Space 200 Quinn Orthopedic Physical Therapy Office Space 300 Apple Office Space 400 story health Office Space 20833 100 Apple Office Space 20863 100 Mark Thomas & Company Office Space 250 Apple Reprographics Office Space 260 Ventana Micro Systems Office Space 275 LeptonAI Office Space 300 Apple Office Space 400 Freyer & Laureta Civil Engineers Office Space 410 Anritsu Americas Sales Company Office Space 450 Rongcheer LLC Office Space 456 Ventana Micro Systems Office Space 480 J. Volckmann & Associates Office Space 500 Fitness Center Fitness Center 510 Luster Inc. Office Space 530 Nichia America Office Space 540 OptoFidelity, Inc. Office Space 560 CloudMosa, Inc. Office Space 580 Affiliated Psychologists Office Space 20883 100 Foxlink International Inc. Office Space 150 Human MSY Holdings Office Space 200 Apple Office Space 344 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 344 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 11 The following table summarizes subject property utility providers. TABLE 2-2 Utility Providers Utility Providers Electricity Pacific Gas & Electric Natural gas (used for heating) Pacific Gas & Electric Water City of Cupertino Sewer City of Cupertino 2.5 Hazardous Substances and Petroleum Products Langan did not observe hazardous substances and petroleum products at the subject property during the site reconnaissance. 2.5.1 Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) Langan did not observe USTs at the subject property during the site reconnaissance. 2.5.2 Aboveground Storage Tanks (ASTs) Langan did not observe ASTs during the site reconnaissance, with the exception of one inactive diesel backup generator on the eastern perimeter of the subject property. Langan did not observe indications of leaks or releases from the inactive diesel generator. Langan also observed a second inactive natural gas generator in the parking garage of Building 208883. This generator did not appear to contain a fuel tank. However, a small, top-loaded tank of liquid was observed. It is believed that this liquid was coolant. 2.5.3 Drums, Totes, and Intermediate Bulk Containers Langan did not observe drums, totes, or intermediate bulk containers at the subject property during the site reconnaissance. 2.5.4 Other Chemical Storage, Containers, or Equipment Langan observed shelves and storage cabinets containing retail-size containers of maintenance- related products and janitorial products in the maintenance and storage rooms throughout the subject property. 345 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 345 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 12 Langan observed the following compressed gas containers: • One large carbon dioxide beverage carbonation tank for located in Suite 100 of Building 20807. • One small carbon dioxide beverage carbonation tank for located in Suite 100 of Building 20883. Langan observed the following fluid-containing equipment: • Four pad-mounted transformers were identified and shown on Figure 2. One located at the northeast corner of Building 20883. One located at the southeast corner of Building 20813. One located on the western exterior of Building 20863. One located at the northeast corner of Building 20833. Langan did not observe labels on the transformers; however, the key site manager stated the transformers are non-PCB containing units. Langan did not observe indications of leaks or releases from the transformers. • Two vaulted transformers. One located within the asphalt parking lot at the southeastern corner of Suite 100 at Building 20863. One located within landscaping at the northeast corner of Suite 400 at Building 20823. Langan did not observe indications of leaks or releases from the transformers. Langan did not observe labels on the transformers; however, the key site manager stated the transformers are non-PCB containing units. Langan did not observe indications of leaks or releases from the transformers. 2.6 Air Emissions Langan did not observe air emissions at the subject property during the site reconnaissance. 2.7 Waste Management The following sections describe current hazardous and non-hazardous waste streams, and observations of fill areas or other solid waste throughout the subject property. 2.7.1 Hazardous Waste Langan did not observe hazardous waste at the subject property during our site reconnaissance. The EDR database report indicates that the subject property has been previously listed in databases for the use of hazardous waste between 1989 and 2019, handling but not generating hazardous waste between 2014 and 2020 and has disposed of both organic waste and asbestos containing materials (ACMs) at instances ranging from 2008 to 2017 and 2012 to 2016, respectively. 346 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 346 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 13 However, based on the age of the buildings on-site, it is possible that asbestos and/or lead-based paint were used in building materials. Prior to any demolition activities, an asbestos, lead -based paint, and universal waste survey should be conducted. Langan considers this a BER. Historical hazardous waste generation is discussed further in Section 3.2. 2.7.2 Non-Hazardous Waste Langan did not observe non-hazardous waste or non-hazardous waste containers at the subject property during the site reconnaissance. 2.7.3 Fill Areas or Solid Waste Langan did not observe areas that were apparently filled or graded by non-natural causes (or filled with material of unknown origin) that suggest the presence of garbage, construction debris, demolition debris, or other solid waste disposal, or mounds or depressions suggesting solid waste disposal. 2.8 Wastewater Sanitary and process wastewater are discharged to the Cupertino Sanitary District municipal sanitary sewer system. Langan observed floor drains in the restrooms and in the janitorial closet. Langan did not observe or identify evidence of septic systems or cesspools at the subject property. 2.9 Storm Water Storm water at the subject property percolates through pervious areas or sheet flows to the adjoining roadways into the municipal storm sewer system. Langan did not observe evidence of impact (e.g., sheens, staining) to storm water pathways. 3.0 SUBJECT PROPERTY HISTORY AND RECORDS REVIEW The following sections provide summaries of the historical uses of the subject property, and available information regarding documented environmental conditions associated with the historical uses. 347 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 347 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 14 3.1 Historical Summary Langan compiled the following summary of the subject property history based on a review of readily available and reasonably ascertainable sources and interviews. Historical resources are provided in Appendix E. TABLE 3-1 Subject Property History Time Period Historical Discussion 1897-1960s The subject property is depicted with three structures on the 1897 through 1948 topographic maps. In the 1953 topographic map, only one building is depicted on the southern portion of the subject property. In the 1939 through 1968 aerial photographs, the subject property appears as agricultural land with two farm buildings on the southeastern portion. The subject property remains relatively unchanged through 1968. 1960s- Present In the 1974 aerial photograph, it appears that the crops and farm buildings were removed and the existing buildings at 20823 Stevens Creek Boulevard and 20863 Stevens Creek Boulevard and associated asphalt parking were constructed, and an additional commercial building and associated asphalt parking was constructed on the southeast corner of the subject property. In the 1982 aerial photograph , it appears the existing building located at 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard was constructed in the southwest corner of the subject property. In the 1991 aerial photograph, it appears the existing building located at 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard was constructed in the northeast corner of the subject property. In the 2006 aerial photograph, it appears the existing building located at 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard was constructed in the southeast corner of the subject property and that the subject property appears as it does present day. No Sanborn Maps were available for the subject property. Historical information was not readily available to characterize the subject property to its initial developed use or 1939. A 1939 aerial photograph indicates the subject property was already developed for agricultural uses and earlier historical resources identifying the use of the subject property were not available. Based on knowledge of the area, it is unlikely that the subject property was used for developed purposes other than agricultural prior to 1939 and the data gap is not considered significant. Environmental concerns related to historical operations are discussed further in Section 3.3. 348 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 348 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 15 3.2 Regulatory Database Review The subject property is subject property was identified on the FINDS, ENF, ECHO, RCRA NonGen/NLR, CERS, HWTS, HAZNET, CIWQS, and E MANIFESTS, databases searched by the environmental database report. The database listings are discussed below. Panera Bread Café 4471 – 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard This facility was listed on the CERS database for having a hazardous materials business plan (HMBP). This database listing is likely not an environmental concern for the subject property. J. Volckman Associates – 20813 Stevens Creek Boulevard This facility was listed on the HWTS database for having hazardous waste that was being tracked on-site from 1989 to 2000. This database listing is likely not an environmental concern for the subject property. Stevens Creek Office Center Associates, LP – 20813, 20823, 20863 Stevens Creek Boulevard Suites 480 and 300 These facilities at the subject property were listed on the ECHO databases. No further information was available on the database listing. The facilities were also listed on the FINDS database under the RCRA Information System, and on the RCRA NonGen database for handling but not generating hazardous waste in 2018 and 2020. The facilities were listed on the HAZNET and E MANIFEST databases for disposing of 5.2 tons of asbestos containing waste at a landfill in 2012, and on the HWTS database for having hazardous waste that was being tracked on-site from 2012 to 2013 and in 2018. No additional information was available for this database listing. None of the database listings indicated unauthorized releases. These database listings are likely not an environmental concern for the subject property. Cupertino SD CS – 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard Suite 104 This facility at the subject property was listed on the CERS and ENF databases for a 2007 sewage spill, and on the FINDS and CIWQS databases for a storm water discharge to the municipal storm system. These database listings are likely not an environmental concern for the subject property. In response to our FOIA request Langan received records from CAL FIRE on a gas leak at Building 20833 on 10 October 2012. The response by the local fire department is summarized as follows: At approximately 9:22 AM Truck 1, Engine 1, Engine 9, Engine 16, and Battalion 2 crews responded to a gas investigation. Upon arrival the Truck 1 crew found a two-story office building with nothing showing. The Engine 1 Captain established Stevens Creek Incident Command. 349 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 349 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 16 The Truck 1 crew met with the contractor on site who stated his crew had hit a 1” gas line and had clamped it off. The Truck 1 crew investigated and found that the gas line had been clamped and was not actively leaking. The Truck 1 crew cancelled the balance of the response and terminated command. The Truck 1 crew used a four-gas detector in the building and there were no detected levels of gas inside the structure. The scene was turned over to the contractor and a Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) representative. This incident is likely not an environmental concern for the subject property. Apple Inc. – Stevens Creek 03A – 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard This facility was listed on the HAZNET database for storing and off-site incineration of several tons of organic solids and laboratory waste chemicals from 2015 to 2017. The subject property was listed on the HWTS database for having hazardous waste that was being tracked on-site from 2014 to 2019, and on the RCRA NonGen/NLR database for handling but not generating hazardous waste in 2014. The subject property was also listed on the ECHO and FINDS databases. No further information was available on the database listings. No violations were reported for these database listings. These database listings are likely not an environmental concern for the subject property. Stevens Creek Office Center – 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard This facility was listed on the HAZNET and HWTS databases for disposing one ton of organic solid waste in a landfill in 2012. No organic solid wase was observed during the site reconnaissance. These database listings are likely not an environmental concern for the subject property. Burbank SD CS – 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard Suite 104 This facility was listed on the CIWQS database for having a minor violation of the water quality standards in their collection system in May 2007, likely associated with storm water runoff from the building. The subject property was listed on the CERS database for a minor violation related to the subject property’s water quality in December 2004. This facility was also listed on the FINDS and ENF databases. No additional information was provided. These database listings are likely not an environmental concern for the subject property. 350 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 350 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 17 Apple – 20863 Stevens Creek Boulevard Suite 300 This facility was listed on the HAZNET and HWTS databases for disposing of 4.8 tons of asbestos containing waste in a landfill in 2016. These database listings are likely not an environmental concern for the subject property. However, based on the age of the buildings on-site, it is possible that asbestos and/or lead-based paint were used in building materials. Prior to any demolition activities, an asbestos, lead-based paint, and universal waste survey should be conducted. Langan considers this a BER. The environmental database report is attached as Appendix F. The subject property was also not identified on the GeoTracker, PFAS exchange, or Environmental Working Group (EWG) PFAS Interactive Map. 3.3 Prior Report Review Langan was provided with a 2020 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment by Ninyo & Moore for the subject property. Ninyo & Moore’s Phase I ESA indicated that the subject property was developed in the early 1900s as an orchard with a few farm buildings located on the southern portion of the property. In the early 1970s, the orchard and the farm buildings were removed, and the subject property was developed to the present state by 2005. In general, interior construction materials within the observed tenant spaces included a variety of carpeting, ceramic floor tiles, painted and textured walls, and ceilings. Ninyo & Moore did not observe quantities of hazardous substances or petroleum products used or stored at the subject property during their reconnaissance of the subject property with the exception of a reportedly small amount (approximately 150-gallons) of diesel fuel contained within an integrated belly tank of one of the emergency backup generators located on the subject property. Indications of aboveground storage tanks (ASTs), underground storage tanks (USTs), or hazardous material spills or leaks, were not observed during the reconnaissance of the subject property. Ninyo & Moore identified no wells on the subject property. Ninyo and Moore’s review of an environmental database report obtained for this project indicated that the subject property was listed on several of the regulatory databases researched by EDR, including the CERS, FINDS, CIWQS, ENF, ECHO, FINDS, HWTS, HAZNET, and RCRA NonGen databases. The subject property was listed on the CERS, HWTS, HAZNET, and RCRA NonGen 351 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 351 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 18 databases for previously having small quantities of hazardous wastes on-site. The subject property was also listed on the CIWQS database for having a minor storm water violation. Indications of releases, spills, or mitigation were not indicated on reviewed regulatory agency files. None of the agency database listings are indicative of a REC. Ninyo and Moore indicated several off-site facilities were located within the EDR search radius from the subject property. None of the listed facilities were considered to be a REC to the subject property at this time based on several factors, including distance from the subject property, location relative to the regional groundwater flow direction (e.g. hydraulically downgradient or crossgradient to the subject property), database listing type, and/or affected media (soil only). The 2020 Phase I ESA by Ninyo & Moore did not identify any RECs in connection with the subject property. Ninyo & Moore’s Phase I ESA also included Phase I ESA for Stevens Creek Office Center prepared by EMG dated 27 July 2014. EMG identified no RECs, HRECs, CRECs, or Business Environmental Risks (BERs), except for asbestos-containing materials in the form of roofing materials, vinyl floor tile, wallboard/joint compound, stucco, and various mastics, were identified. EMG reported that these materials were observed to be in good condition. These materials were not considered a REC. Based on the age of the buildings on-site, it is possible that asbestos and/or lead-based paint were used in building materials. Prior to any demolition activities, an asbestos, lead-based paint, and universal waste survey should be conducted. Langan considers this a BER. 4.0 ADJOINING PROPERTIES AND SURROUNDING AREA The following sections describe current and historical uses of and database listings for adjoining properties and the surrounding area. 4.1 Current Use of Adjoining Properties and Surrounding Area The current use of adjoining and surrounding properties is summarized in Table 4-1. 352 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 352 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 19 TABLE 4-1 Current Use of Adjoining Properties and Surrounding Area Langan did not observe obvious conditions likely to represent environmental concerns for the subject property from current uses of adjoining or surrounding properties. 4.2 Adjoining Properties and Surrounding Area History Langan compiled the following summaries of the adjoining properties and surrounding area history based on a review of historical resources and interviews. Historical resources are provided in Appendix E. TABLE 4-2 Historical Use of Adjoining Properties Direction Adjoining Properties North The northern adjoining property is depicted as undeveloped on topographic maps in the late 1800s and early 1900s. The property appears as agricultural land on aerial photographs beginning in 1939 through 1968. In the 1968 aerial photograph, the northern adjoining property appears to have been cleared of crops and the construction of Alves Drive appears to be underway. In the 1974 aerial photograph, Alves Drive is present followed by a fitness center and residential homes as they appear to this day. Langan does not consider the historical use of the northern adjoining property an environmental concern for the subject property. East The eastern adjoining property is depicted as undeveloped on topographic maps from the late 1800s to early 1900s. The property appears as agricultural land with two buildings in the 1939 through 1956 aerial photographs. Beginning in 1963, aerial photographs show the property was developed with Saich Way followed by a large commercial building and asphalt parking as it appears to this day. Langan does not consider the historical use of the eastern adjoining property an environmental concern for the subject property. Direction Adjoining Properties Surrounding Area North Alves Drive followed by a fitness center and residential properties. A fitness center and residential properties. East A daycare and various commercial properties followed by Saich Way. Commercial properties. South Stevens Creek Boulevard followed by a church and various commercial property. Residential and commercial properties. West A church and a grocery store. Residential and commercial properties, including a Shell Service Station 353 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 353 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 20 Direction Adjoining Properties South The southern adjoining property is depicted Stevens Creek Boulevard followed by undeveloped land on topographic maps in the late 1800s to early 1900s. In the 1939 through 1950 aerial photographs, Stevens Creek Boulevard appears as a two-lane dirt or paved road. By 1956, the aerial photograph shows Stevens Creek Boulevard has been expanded to a four-lane road. By 1963, Stevens Creek Boulevard has been expanded to a six-lane road followed by commercial properties as they appear to this day. Langan does not consider the historical use of the southern adjoining property an environmental concern for the subject property. West The western adjoining property is depicted as largely undeveloped land with one structure on topographic maps in the late 1800s to early 1900s. By 1956, aerial photographs show residential homes on the northern border of the property. By 1963, aerial photographs show that the crops and previous buildings have been removed and a residential home has been constructed on the southern portion of the property, while a church and associated parking has been constructed on the northern portion of the property. By 1974, aerial photographs show the residential home has been removed and two commercia buildings and associated parking have been constructed on the southern portion of the property, while a residential home has been built east of the church on the northern portion of the property. By 2006 , aerial photographs show the commercial buildings and associated parking on the southern portion of the property have been removed and the property appears to be under construction. By 2009, aerial photographs show the construction on the southern portion of the property is complete with a large commercial building and associated parking as it appears to this day. The previous tenants included the Anderson Chevrolet Dealership from as early as 1992 to 2005, where total petroleum hydrocarbons as motor oil (TPHmo) w as detected in soils surrounding hydraulic lifts during their removal in 2006. Database listings associated with the western adjoining property are discussed in Section 4.3. Langan does not consider the historical use of the western adjoining property an environmental concern for the subject property. The surrounding area was depicted as undeveloped or agricultural land in the topographic maps in the late 1800s and early 1900s. Limited commercial development and rural residences were observed on aerial photographs in the early 1900s. Stevens Creek Boulevard was depicted in the 1897 topographic map and Saich Way was present in the aerial photographs by 1948, and Alves Drive was present in the aerial photographs by 1982. The large commercial building to the east of the subject property was constructed in the early 1960s. The residential homes and fitness center to the north of the subject property were constructed in the early 1970s. The residential homes, church, and large commercial building to the west of the subject property were constructed in the mid-1950s, mid-1960s and early 2000s, respectively. The church and commercial buildings to the south of the subject property were constructed in the early 1960s and mid-1990s, respectively. The surrounding area appears in similar configuration from 2009 to present. 354 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 354 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 21 Langan does not consider the historical uses of the surrounding area properties an environmental concern for the subject property. 4.3 Regulatory Database Review Langan reviewed the environmental database report to evaluate if adjoining or surrounding area properties identified in the database report are suspected to represent an environmental concern for the subject property (see Section 8.2). Langan did not consider request and review of the associated regulatory agency files necessary to evaluate potential RECs for the subject property unless discussed in Section 4.3.1 or 4.3.2 below. 4.3.1 Adjoining Properties Database listings for adjoining properties are summarized as follows. The Vitamin Shoppe #648 – 20803 Stevens Creek Boulevard (south-southeastern adjoining, inferred crossgradient) This property was identified on the RCRA NonGen/NLR database for handling but not generating hazardous waste in 2019. This database listing is likely not an environmental concern for the subject property. Saich Way Station, LLC – 20803 Stevens Creek Boulevard (south-southeastern adjoining, inferred crossgradient) This property was identified on the HAZNET and HWTS databases for disposing of 0.8 tons of asbestos containing waste in a landfill in 2014. This database listing is likely not an environmental concern for the subject property. Anderson Chevrolet Dealership – 20955 Stevens Creek Boulevard (west-southwestern adjoining, inferred crossgradient) This property was identified on the LUST, CERS, CORTESE, HIST CORTESE, and HIST LUST Santa Clara databases for potential soil contamination from a waste/motor/hydraulic/lubricating oil leak. The case was opened in May 1998 and after remediation activities were completed, Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) issued case closure for the property in July 1998. The property was also listed on the SWEEPS UST database for having a waste oil tank installed on the property in February 1988. This database listing is likely not an environmental concern for the subject property due to case closure. 355 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 355 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 22 This property was also listed on the ENVIROSTOR database as an open case due to the detection of TPHmo in soils surrounding several hydraulic lifts during removal. As a result, approximately 560 cubic yards of soil were removed from the property between March and June 2006. On July 10, 2006, EFI Global collected soil samples adjacent to the former hydraulic lifts. EFI Global collected 12 samples at depths ranging from seven to 16 feet below the ground surface (bgs). Diesel (TPHd) and motor oil (TPHmo) were detected above the laboratory reporting limit at concentrations of 7.8 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) and 14 mg/kg, respectively, at the CS-5 sample location. None of the TPHd or TPHmo detected exceeded the residential environmental screening levels (ESLs) in any of the samples analyzed. This database listing is likely not an environmental concern for the subject property due to the age of the case and the media affected. 4.3.2 Surrounding Area Langan evaluated each of the database listings for surrounding area properties (see Section 8.2). Those warranting further discussion in the context of potential to represent an environmental concern for the subject property are discussed below. Unocal Station #7000 – 20755 Stevens Creek Boulevard (approximately 126 feet east-southeast, inferred crossgradient) This property was identified on the LUST database for a gasoline leak that potentially contaminated the nearby drinking water aquifer. The case was opened in June 2003 and after remediation and cleanup activities were completed to the satisfaction of the SCCDEH, the case was closed in December 2006. This property was also identified on the SWEEPS, UST, HIST CORTESE, and HIST UST databases for having several USTs containing petroleum hydrocarbons since 1988. This database listing is likely not an environmental concern for the subject property due to the case closure and crossgradient direction in relation to the subject property. De Anza Shell – 20999 Stevens Creek Boulevard (approximately 548 feet east-southeast, inferred crossgradient) This property was identified on the LUST database for a gasoline leak that contaminated the soil surrounding gasoline USTs and associated piping removed and replaced in August 1988. Soil samples were collected from the exposed soils beneath the removed tanks and were analyzed for petroleum hydrocarbons as TPHg, TPHd, BTEX compounds, and methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE). TPHg was detected in the samples analyzed at concentrations as high as 740 mg/kg while TPHd was detected in the samples analyzed at concentrations as high as 15,000 mg/kg. 356 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 356 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 23 Impacts to groundwater were not detected. The case was opened in November 1988 and after remediation and cleanup activities were completed to the satisfaction of the SCCDEH’s Leaking Underground Storage Tank Oversight Program, the case was closed in June 2000. This property was also identified on the SWEEPS, UST, CA FID UST, CERS TANKS, HIST CORTESE, and HIST UST databases for having several USTs containing petroleum hydrocarbons since 1983. This property was also identified on the RCRA NONGEN / NLR, RCRA-SQG, FINDS, ECHO, HWST, HAZNET, CERS HAZ WASTE, CUPA LISTINGS, EMI, and CERS for generating small quantities of hazardous waste. A number of hazardous waste storage, management, monitoring, and disposal violations were recorded. This database listing is likely not an environmental concern for the subject property due to the age of the case, case closure, and the media affected. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS, FINDINGS AND OPINIONS Langan completed a Phase I ESA consistent with the scope and limitations of ASTM E1527-21 for the subject property at 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California. Exceptions to, or deletions from, ASTM E1527-21 are described in Section 8 of this report. No RECs, CRECs, HRECs, de minimis conditions, or significant data gaps were identified during this assessment. This assessment has revealed the following BERs connection with the subject property as presented in Table 5-1. 357 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 357 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 24 TABLE 5-1 Conclusions, Findings and Opinions ASTM E1527-21 Scope Items Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) Langan did not identify any RECs. Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions (CRECs) Langan did not identify CRECs. Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions (HRECs) Langan did not identify any HRECs. De Minimis Conditions Langan did not identify any de minimis conditions. Significant Data Gaps Langan did not identify and significant data gaps. Non-ASTM E1527-21 Scope Items Business Environmental Risks (BERs) The following BERs were identified in association with the site: Aerial photographs show the site was a part of larger agricultural fields from 1939 through at least 1960 on which agricultural chemicals such as pesticides, herbicides, and heavy metals may have been applied . Based on this history, it is possible that pesticide and herbicide compounds and heavy metals are present in shallow soil beneath the site. Based on the age of the buildings on-site, it is possible that asbestos and/or lead-based paint were used in building materials. Prior to any demolition activities, an asbestos, lead-based paint, and universal waste survey should be conducted. 358 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 358 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 25 6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONAL STATEMENT I declare that to the best of my professional knowledge and belief, I meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in Section 312.10 of 40 CFR Part 312 and I have the specific qualifications based on my education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the subject property. I have developed and performed all appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312. Peter J. Cusack Associate Principal (Environmental Professional) Resumes outlining the qualifications of the project team, and the Environmental Professional are included in Appendix G. 359 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 359 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 26 7.0 REFERENCES Langan used the following sources to complete this Phase I ESA. • ASTM E1527-21, Standard Practice for Environmental Property Assessments: Phase I Environmental Property Assessment Process, published 16 November 2021 • Delta Consultants, Annual GRASP Monitoring Report, Shell Service Station, 20999 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California, 29 October 2010 • EDR, Inc., Radius Map Report with GeoCheck, 20807, 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California 95014, 1 April 2025 • EDR, Inc., City Directory Image Report, 20807, 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California 95014, 3 April 2025 • EDR, Inc., Aerial Photographs, 20807, 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California 95014, 1 April 2025 • EDR, Inc., Historical Topographic Map Report, 20807, 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California 95014, 1 April 2025 • Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council, Per and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Technical and Regulatory Guidance, July 2023 • EFI Global, Results of Limited Subsurface Soils Investigation at the Former Anderson Chevrolet Car Dealership as Requested by The Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health – 20955 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California, 31 July 2006 • EMG, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Stevens Creek Office Center, 20813- 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard, Cupertino, California, 27 July 2014 • Ninyo & Moore, Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Stevens Creek Office Center, 20807, 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Blvd., Cupertino, California, 21 July 2020 • PFAS Exchange GIS Webviewer, https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/12412ab41b3141598e0bb48523a7c940/ • United States Census Bureau, North American Industry Classification System, https://www.census.gov/naics/ • U.S. EPA 40 CFR Part 302 (EPA-HQ-OLEM-2019-0341; FRL-7204-03-OLEM), RIN 2050-AH09, Designation of Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctanesulfonic Acid (PFOS) as CERCLA Hazardous Substances, Final Rule, 8 May 2024 • U.S. EPA ECHO database: https://echo.epa.gov/ searched 24 April 2025 360 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 360 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 27 • U.S. EPA ECHO: PFAS Analytic Tools - https://echo.epa.gov/trends/pfas-tools • U.S. EPA ENVIROFACTS database: https://enviro.epa.gov/ searched 24 April 2025 • U.S. EPA MyProperty database: https://www3.epa.gov/enviro/facts/myproperty/searched 24 April 2025 • Santa Clara County Assessor’s Office database: https://www.sccassessor.org/ searched 24 April 2025 TABLE 6-1 Dates of Assessment Components COMPONENT DATE Interviews 16 and 18 April 2025 Review of government records 1 April 2025 Site reconnaissance 18 April 2025 Declaration by Environmental Professional 30 April 2025 8.0 LIMITATIONS AND DEFINITIONS This Phase I ESA report was prepared for Client and is intended to be used in its entirety. Excerpts taken from this report are not necessarily representative of the assessment findings. The Client is the sole intended beneficiary of the report. The user requested no special terms or conditions regarding this Phase I ESA. Langan’s scope of services, which is described in Section 1.2 and in the contract executed between Langan and the Client, was limited to that agreed to with the Client/user and no other services beyond those explicitly stated are implied. To the extent possible, the services performed and agreed upon for this Phase I ESA are consistent with the guidelines of ASTM E1527-21. This report is not intended to be an exhaustive assessment of the subject property. The purpose of the Phase I ESA is to reduce uncertainty about unknown conditions at the subject property. No environmental site assessment can wholly eliminate uncertainty regarding the potential for RECs in connection with a subject property. Therefore, Langan cannot “verify,” “insure,” "certify," or “guarantee” that the subject property is free of environmental concerns. 361 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 361 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 28 No expressed or implied representation or warranty is included or intended in this report, except that our services were completed using the care and skill ordinarily followed by professionals providing similar services under similar circumstances in similar locations at the same point in time. The conclusions provided in this report are based solely on information obtained through completing the standard activities required by ASTM E1527-21 and are intended exclusively for the purpose stated herein, at the specified subject property, as it existed at the point in time the assessment was completed. The conclusions provided in this report do not apply to conditions and features of which Langan was not made aware of through good faith efforts to complete the activities required by ASTM E1527-21 and did not have the opportunity to evaluate. 8.1 ASTM Definitions The following definitions are provided in ASTM E1527-21 and presented below for reference. This section is not a comprehensive list of definitions provided in ASTM E1527-21 and is intended to summarize those pertinent to this Phase I ESA report. Activity and use limitations (AULs): legal or physical restrictions or limitations on the use of, or access to, a site or facility: (1) to reduce or eliminate potential exposure to hazardous substances or petroleum products in the soil, soil vapor, groundwater, and/or surface water on the property, or (2) to prevent activities that could interfere with the effective-ness of a response action, in order to ensure maintenance of a condition of no significant risk to public health or the environment. These legal or physical restrictions, which may include institutional and/or engineering controls, are intended to prevent adverse impacts to individuals or populations that may be exposed to hazardous substances and petroleum products in the soil, soil vapor, groundwater, and/or surface water on a property. Adjoining properties: any real property or properties the border of which is contiguous or partially contiguous with that of the subject property, or that would be contiguous or partially contiguous with that of the subject property but for a street, road, or other public thoroughfare separating them. All Appropriate Inquiries: that inquiry constituting all appropriate inquiries into the previous ownership and uses of the subject property consistent with good commercial and customary practice as defined in CERCLA, 42 U.S.C.§ 9601(35)(B) and 40 C.F.R. Part 312, that will qualify a party to a commercial real estate transaction for one of the threshold criteria for satisfying the 362 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 362 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 29 LLPs to CERCLA liability (42U.S.C. §§ 9601(35)(A) & (B), § 9607(b)(3), § 9607(q), and§ 9607(r)), assuming compliance with other elements of the defense. Approximate minimum search distance: the area for which records must be obtained and reviewed pursuant to ASTM E1527-21 Section 8 subject to the limitations provided in that section. This may include areas outside the subject property and shall be measured from the nearest subject property boundary. This term is used in lieu of radius to include irregularly shaped properties. Business environmental risk (BER): a risk which can have a material environmental or environmentally driven impact on the business associated with the current or planned use of commercial real estate. Controlled recognized environmental condition (CREC): recognized environmental condition affecting the subject property that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or authorities with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to implementation of required controls (for example, activity and use limitations or other property use limitations). Data gap: a lack of or inability to obtain information required by this practice despite good faith efforts by the environmental professional to gather such information. Data gaps may result from incompleteness in any of the activities required by this practice, including, but not limited to, site reconnaissance (for example, an inability to conduct the site visit), and interviews (for example, an inability to interview the key site manager, regulatory officials, etc.). De minimis condition: a condition related to a release that generally does not present a threat to human health or the environment and that generally would not be the subject of an enforcement action if brought to the attention of appropriate governmental agencies. A condition determined to be a de minimis condition is not a recognized environmental condition nor a controlled recognized environmental condition. Engineering controls: physical modifications to a site or facility (for example, capping, slurry walls, or point of use water treatment) to reduce or eliminate the potential for exposure to hazardous substances or petroleum products in the soil or groundwater on a property. Engineering controls are a type of activity and use limitation (AUL). Environment: environment shall have the same meaning as the definition of environment in CERCLA 42 U.S.C. § 9601(8). 363 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 363 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 30 Historical recognized environmental condition (HREC): previous release of hazardous substances or petroleum products affecting the subject property that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or authorities and meeting unrestricted use criteria established by the applicable regulatory authority or authorities without subjecting the subject property to any controls (for example, activity and use limitations or other property use limitations). A historical recognized environmental condition is not a recognized environmental condition. Institutional controls (IC): a legal or administrative mechanism (for example, “deed restrictions,” restrictive covenants, easements, or zoning) on the use of, or access to, a site or facility to (1) reduce or eliminate potential exposure to hazardous substances or petroleum products in the soil or groundwater on the property, or (2) to prevent activities that could interfere with the effectiveness of a response action, in order to ensure maintenance of a condition of no signiﬁcant risk to public health or the environment. An institutional control is a type of activity and use limitation (AUL). Key site manager: the person identiﬁed by the owner or operator of a subject property as having good knowledge of the uses and physical characteristics of the subject property. Material threat: obvious threat which is likely to lead to a release and that, in the opinion of the environmental professional, would likely result in impact to public health or the environment. Obvious: that which is plain or evident; a condition or fact that could not be ignored or overlooked by a reasonable observer. Property use limitation: limitation or restriction on current or future use of a property in connection with a response to a release, in accordance with the applicable regulatory authority or authorities that allows hazardous sub-stances or petroleum products to remain in place at concentrations exceeding unrestricted use criteria. Reasonably ascertainable: information that is (1) publicly available, (2) obtainable from its source within reasonable time and cost constraints, and (3) practically reviewable. Recognized environmental conditions: (1) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release to the environment; (2) the likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release or likely release to the environment; or (3) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property under conditions that pose a material threat 364 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 364 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 31 of a future release to the environment. For the purposes of this definition, “likely” is that which is neither certain nor proved but can be expected or believed by a reasonable observer based on the logic and/or experience of the environmental professional, and/or available evidence, as stated in the report to support the opinions given therein. Release: a release of any hazardous substance or petroleum product shall have the same meaning as the definition of “release” in CERCLA 42 U.S.C. § 9601(22). There are a number of statutory exclusions from the definition of release that may impact the environmental professional’s opinions and conclusions, such as the normal application of fertilizer. Significant data gap: a data gap that affects the ability of the environmental professional to identify a recognized environmental condition. Site reconnaissance: that part that is contained in Section 9 of ASTM E1527-21 and addresses what should be done in connection with the site visit. The site reconnaissance includes, but is not limited to, the site visit done in connection with such a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. Site visit: the visit of the subject property during which observations are made constituting the site reconnaissance section of this practice. Subject property: the property that is the subject of the environmental site assessment described in this practice. User: the party seeking to use ASTM E1527-21 to complete an environmental site assessment of the subject property. 8.2 Standard Environmental Record Sources Langan reviewed an environmental database search report prepared by an environmental database search provider for the subject property and surrounding area. The database search report includes a listing of properties identified on select federal, state, local and tribal standard source environmental databases within the approximate minimum search radii outlined in ASTM E1527-21. This information was supplied to Langan by the environmental database search provider, and to the environmental database search provider by government sources; therefore, neither Langan nor the environmental database search provider can verify the completeness and accuracy of the database information. Appendix F contains a copy of the report, with specific source and property descriptions, and the dates of the last update for each database searched. 365 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 365 of 2882 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California 11 June 2025 770709101 Page 32 Langan reviewed the database search report on a record-by-record basis to evaluate if certain properties identified in the database report are likely to represent an environmental concern for the subject property. The evaluation criteria included factors such as distance, groundwater gradient, nature of the listing, and regulatory status. Unless specifically discussed in the body of this report, the facilities listed on the database do not appear to represent an env ironmental concern to the subject property. 366 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 366 of 2882 APPENDIX A FIGURES 367 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 367 of 2882 368 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 368 of 2882 369 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 369 of 2882 370 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 370 of 2882 APPENDIX B AGENCY RECORDS AND OTHER REPORTS 371 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 371 of 2882 County of Santa Clara Department of Environmental Health Ilazarctou5 Materials CompliclOce Division ! 555 Berger Drive Suite 300 San Jose Californi(1 951 12-2716 (408) 918-3400 FAX (408) 280-6479 WWW EHinfo org June 29, 2006 Depmtment of Ioxics Substance Control Site Mitigation Program 700 Heinz Avenue, Building F, 2'd Floor Berkeley, CA 94710 RE: Senate Bill 1248 written notification·-Local c1eannp agreement Ihis is a "'1itten notification as required by section 512..3 of SBI248 All the required information is given below: I. Site name and location: Anderson ChevTOlet Dealership 20955 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, CA 95014 2. Name and address of the responsible party: Mr.. Peter Pau, Manager SHP-Cupertino, LIC 30 East Fourth Avenue San Mateo, CA 94401 This site consists of a parcel of 5.3 acres and is a former car' dealership and service facility that went thTOugh site facility closure.. Future site proposal include construction of a retail food store On January 20, 2006 and March 29, 2006, in the course of removal of several hydraulic lifts, Iotal Petroleum HydTOcarbons (TPH) as Motor Oil was encountered. Levels of IPH from 79 to 5500 milligrams per kilogram (mglkg) were detected at depth of 8 feet bgs. Clean base samples were found at depths between 10 and 14 feet An estimated 560 cubic yards of soil has been excavared The planned involvement by the County of Santa Clara is to oversee the remedial and sampling activities as requested by the responsible pmty If you need any further information about this site, please contact the undersigned at (408) 918- 1984 Sincerely, ;tt(ldvf'~ Nicole Pullman Hazardous Materials Program Manager Hazmdous Materials Compliance Division Board of Supervisors: Donald F Gage Blanca Alvarado Pete MCHugt1 James T Beall Jr Liz Kniss County Executive: Peter Kutras J1 8-00, 372 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 372 of 2882 373 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 373 of 2882 374 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 374 of 2882 375 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 375 of 2882 376 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 376 of 2882 377 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 377 of 2882 378 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 378 of 2882 379 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 379 of 2882 380 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 380 of 2882 381 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 381 of 2882 38 2 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 382 of 2882 383 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 383 of 2882 384 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 384 of 2882 385 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 385 of 2882 386 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 386 of 2882 38 7 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 387 of 2882 38 8 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 388 of 2882 38 9 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 389 of 2882 390 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 390 of 2882 391 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 391 of 2882 392 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 392 of 2882 393 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 393 of 2882 394 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 394 of 2882 395 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 395 of 2882 396 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 396 of 2882 397 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 397 of 2882 398 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 398 of 2882 399 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 399 of 2882 400 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 400 of 2882 401 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 401 of 2882 402 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 402 of 2882 403 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 403 of 2882 404 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 404 of 2882 405 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 405 of 2882 406 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 406 of 2882 407 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 407 of 2882 408 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 408 of 2882 409 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 409 of 2882 410 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 410 of 2882 411 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 411 of 2882 412 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 412 of 2882 413 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 413 of 2882 41 4 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 414 of 2882 415 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 415 of 2882 416 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 416 of 2882 41 7 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 417 of 2882 418 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 418 of 2882 419 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 419 of 2882 420 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 420 of 2882 421 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 421 of 2882 422 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 422 of 2882 423 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 423 of 2882 424 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 424 of 2882 425 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 425 of 2882 43080 CA 10/10/2012 2840028CU 39878 ShumateMark C T1 10/10/2012 39878 ShumateMark C T1 10/10/2012 000 1. Truck 1, Engine 1, Engine 9, Engine 16 and Battalion 2 crews responded to a gas investigation. 2. Upon arrival Truck 1 crew found a 2 story office building with nothing showing. Engine 1 Captain established Stevens Creek Incident Command. 3. Truck 1 crew met with the contractor who stated his crew had hit a 1" gas line and had clamped it off. Truck 1 crew investigated and found the gas line had been clamped and was not actively leaking. Truck 1 crew cancelled the balance of the response and terminated command. Truck 1 crew used a 4 gas detector in the building and there were no detected levels of gas inside the structure. 4. The scene was turned over to the contractor and Pacific Gas & Electric representative. 426 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 426 of 2882 43080 CA 10/10/2012 2840028CU 000 09:22 X 3 0 - Other 93939393E16 11 10/10/2012 09:25 10/10/2012 09:29 10/10/2012 09:22 X 4 0 - Other 86868686T1 13 10/10/2012 09:26 10/10/2012 09:38 10/10/2012 09:22 X 1 0 - Other 427 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 427 of 2882 43080 CA 10/10/2012 2840028CU 000 E16 11 10/10/2012 09:25:47 10/10/2012 09:29:09 10/10/2012 09:22:49 3 0 - Other 93939393 X 45437 Nunez, Dani F 45441 Weber, Anne F 16468 Werner, Jim C T1 13 10/10/2012 09:26:40 10/10/2012 09:38:52 10/10/2012 09:22:48 4 0 - Other 86868686 X 51687 Cohen, Davi F 39878 Shumate, Ma C 45440 Van Hook, P F 41288 Woods, Tiff F B2 92 10/10/2012 09:28:54 10/10/2012 09:30:12 10/10/2012 09:22:50 1 0 - Other 428 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 428 of 2882 43080 CA 10/10/2012 2840028CU 000 E1 11 10/10/2012 09:28:54 10/10/2012 09:30:21 10/10/2012 09:28:33 3 0 - Other 93939393 X 30414 Czerniec, J F 53135 Luke, Brian F 30401 Thomas, Eri C E9 11 10/10/2012 09:28:54 10/10/2012 09:30:21 10/10/2012 09:22:50 3 0 - Other 86868686 X 16309 Connolly, R C 46859 Hensley, Ju F 41283 James, Matt F 429 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 429 of 2882 Total Number of Redactions in Document: 10 Redaction Reasons by Page Page Reason Description Occurrences 1 PII Personnel, Medical or Similar Records, Gov Code 7927.700 10 Redaction Date: 4/8/2025 2:23:48 PM Redaction Log 430 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 430 of 2882 Redaction Reasons by Exemption Reason Description Pages (Count) PII Personnel, Medical or Similar Records, Gov Code 7927.700 1(10) Redaction Date: 4/8/2025 2:23:48 PM Redaction Log 431 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 431 of 2882 APPENDIX C SITE RECONNAISSANCE CHECKLIST AND PHOTOGRAPHS 432 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 432 of 2882 PHASE I ESA SITE RECONNAISSANCE CHECKLIST GENERAL INFORMATION Langan personnel: Daniel Wood Date of site reconnaissance: 4/18/2025 Business name / subject property occupant: 20807, 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Full subject property address: 20807, 20813-20883 Stevens Creek, California Project Number: 770709101 Weather conditions: Sunny 60 Degrees Features, Activities, Uses, and Conditions Identified/Observed? General Subject Property Setting Yes No Current use(s) of the subject property ☒☐ Past use(s) of the subject property ☒☐ Current use(s) of adjoining properties ☒☐ Past use(s) of adjoining properties ☒☐ Current or past uses in the surrounding area ☒☐ Geologic, hydrogeologic, hydrologic, and topographic conditions ☒☐ Structures and other improvements at the subject property ☒☐ Roads ☒☐ Potable water supply/source for the subject property ☐☒ Sewage disposal system for the subject property ☐☒ Interior/Exterior Features At Interior? At Exterior? Yes No Yes No Hazardous substances and petroleum products in connection with identified uses ☐☒☐☒ Storage tanks ☐☒☐☒ Strong, pungent, or noxious odors and their sources ☐☒☐☒ Standing surface water and pools or sumps containing liquids likely to be hazardous substances or petroleum products ☐☒☐☒ Drums, totes, and intermediate bulk containers ☐☒☐☒ Hazardous substance and petroleum product containers not in connection with identified uses ☐☒☐☒ Unidentified substance containers ☐☒☐☒ PCB-containing items ☐☒☐☒ Heating/cooling ☐☒☐☒ Stains or corrosion on floors, walls, or ceilings ☐☒☐☒ Drains and sumps ☐☒☐☒ Pits, ponds, or lagoons ☐☒☐☒ Stained soil or pavement ☐☒☐☒ Stressed vegetation ☐☒☐☒ Solid waste ☐☒☐☒ Water/wastewater ☐☒☐☒ Wells ☐☒☐☒ Septic systems or cesspools ☐☒☐☒ 433 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 433 of 2882 Site Reconnaissance Photographs Client Name: Harvest Properties, Inc. Subject Property Location: 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California Project No. 770709101 Page 1 of 19 Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 1 Direction Photo Taken: Southeast Description: View of building at 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard which houses retail space for a coffee shop and a sandwich shop at the subject property. Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 2 Direction Photo Taken: East Description: View of interior retail storefront within 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard at the subject property. 434 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 434 of 2882 Site Reconnaissance Photographs Client Name: Harvest Properties, Inc. Subject Property Location: 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California Project No. 770709101 Page 2 of 19 Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 3 Direction Photo Taken: South Description: View of interior kitchen wash area at 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard at the subject property. Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 4 Direction Photo Taken: Southwest Description: View of fire riser within maintenance room at 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard at the subject property. 435 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 435 of 2882 Site Reconnaissance Photographs Client Name: Harvest Properties, Inc. Subject Property Location: 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California Project No. 770709101 Page 3 of 19 Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 5 Direction Photo Taken: West Description: View of building at 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard which has two floors of commercial office spaces at the subject property. Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 6 Direction Photo Taken: East Description: View of typical conference space at 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard at the subject property. 436 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 436 of 2882 Site Reconnaissance Photographs Client Name: Harvest Properties, Inc. Subject Property Location: 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California Project No. 770709101 Page 4 of 19 Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 7 Direction Photo Taken: Southeast Description: View of electrical room at 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard at the subject property. Maintenance and touch up paints were present. Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 8 Direction Photo Taken: North Description: View of elevator equipment at 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard at the subject property. 437 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 437 of 2882 Site Reconnaissance Photographs Client Name: Harvest Properties, Inc. Subject Property Location: 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California Project No. 770709101 Page 5 of 19 Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 9 Direction Photo Taken: West Description: View of parking garage at 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard at the subject property. Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 10 Direction Photo Taken: East Description: View of inactive natural gas generator within parking garage at 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard at the subject property. 438 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 438 of 2882 Site Reconnaissance Photographs Client Name: Harvest Properties, Inc. Subject Property Location: 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California Project No. 770709101 Page 6 of 19 Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 11 Direction Photo Taken: East Description: View of maintenance and cleaning supply closet at 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard at the subject property. Various cleaners and paints were present. Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 12 Direction Photo Taken: North Description: View of building at 20863 Stevens Creek Boulevard which has Suites 100, 200, 300, 400, and 500 which are commercial office spaces at the subject property. 439 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 439 of 2882 Site Reconnaissance Photographs Client Name: Harvest Properties, Inc. Subject Property Location: 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California Project No. 770709101 Page 7 of 19 Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 13 Direction Photo Taken: Northeast Description: View of typical office space at 20863 Stevens Creek Boulevard at the subject property. Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 14 Direction Photo Taken: South Description: View of typical electrical room at 20863 Stevens Creek Boulevard at the subject property. 440 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 440 of 2882 Site Reconnaissance Photographs Client Name: Harvest Properties, Inc. Subject Property Location: 20807 and 20813-20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Cupertino, California Project No. 770709101 Page 8 of 19 Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 15 Direction Photo Taken: Northeast Description: View of building at 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard which houses two floors of commercial office space at the subject property. Date 4/18/2025 Photo No. 16 Direction Photo Taken: Southeast Description: View of building at 20823 Stevens Creek Boulevard which has Suites 100, 200, 300, and 400 which are commercial office spaces at the subject property. 441 CC 04-07-2026 Searchable Packet 441 of 2882